Vayechi

“And Yaakov lived ….” (Bereshit, 47:28) It is written in the tractate Avot (Ch. 3, Mishna 17), “if there is no understanding [Binah], then there is no knowledge [Da’at].” “Understanding” means the principles of words of Torah, meaning the reasons for things, as in the phrase often found, “this is the principle,” and by means of this principle man may know several details. “Knowledge” (Da’at, which is more than knowledge; rather a kind of consciousness that enables the intellect to synthesize conflicting information.) is the details. This is the meaning of “if there is no understanding then there is no knowledge,” for if a man does not know the general principle that is the reason for the matter, then he cannot understand the detail, for from one detail is known the next detail. The converse is also true, for if there is no knowledge then there is no understanding. For if one can say that he knows a principle, but does not need to know its resulting details, on this it says, “if there is no knowledge.” Meaning, if the details are not organized for you, then you will not be able to truly know the root of the principle, so how will you be able to branch out from there? This is the meaning of “and he lived,” meaning the root of life, which is the principle of everything; and “Yaakov” means knowledge [Da’at] which is the detail, for Yaakov represents Zeir Anpin. (Zeir Anpin represents the “miniature presence,” and is one of the Divine personae in the kabbalah.) In other words, (Yaakov is) how God watches, or rather, is intimately involved, in every detail necessary for every matter, even the smallest of the small.

Please do not bury me in Egypt. He was concerned that Yoseif would leave his coffin in Egypt until the redemption to ensure that the Israelites would take his own out as well.

ויחי יעקב, “Yaakov lived;” according to Rashi, the reason why this portion has not been separated from the preceding portion by as much as the space of a single letter, is because with the death of Yaakov the “eyes and the heart” of his descendants were as if closed to the spiritual mission they were to bring to the world, as they were being enslaved. You might well ask that seeing that Joseph his son ruled in Egypt for another 54 years during which all of his descendants enjoyed complete freedom, how is that possible? The answer is that this was not quite so. [His family had become culturally too dependent on Egypt. Ed.] When Jacob died, slavery started very, very slowly without anyone taking notice. Another interpretation for the omission of even a minimum amount of blank space in the Torah before the commencement of this portion is that the subject dealt with here was inextricably interwoven with what preceded it, i.e. the Torah’s description of the years during which Yaakov lived thus far.

ויחי יעקב בארץ מצרים, “Yaakov lived in the land of Egypt;” all the years of Yaakov until he settled in Egypt could not truly be described as חיים, “life,” seeing that they were all clouded by different kinds of anguish. It was only during his last seventeen years in Egypt that his mind was at rest and not beset by serious worries of one kind or another. In fact, this whole verse has been inserted in the Torah as a compliment to Joseph who was the cause of Yaakov’s last seventeen years being happy years. During those 17 years he repaid his father who had sustained him for the first seventeen years of his life, by providing for him during the last 17 years of his life. He had been seventeen years old when he had been sold.

ויחי יעקב, “Yaakov “lived;” Rashi explains why there is not even the space of a single letter between the last letter of the previous portion and the first letter of this portion. It is the only time this occurs in the Torah. He writes that as soon as the eyes of Yaakov closed for the last time, so did the spiritual eyes of the Jewish nation and their hearts, on account of the hardships experienced when they became enslaved. [He adds that an alternate explanation is that seeing he was about to reveal parts of the future to his children, G–d immediately deprived him of his prophetic insights, preventing him form carrying out his wish. Ed.] The difficulty with Rashi’s first explanation is that Joseph’s rule in Egypt continued for another 54 years, during which period the Jews enjoyed preferred social status. Also, how do we know that Yaakov had at all been privy to what would happen to his descendants after his death, and when? We would have to answer that in his dream of the ladder he watched the ascension of that ladder by the guardian angel of brother Esau, as Rashi had explained in his commentary of B’reshit Rabbah, 68,12, and as we know from Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 35.

'ויחי יעקב בארץ מצרים וגו, “Why did the Torah mention the number of years that Yaakov lived in Egypt? We could have figured this out from the data the Torah already provided us with about how old Joseph was when he left the house of father, (Genesis 37,2) how old he was when he was appointed as viceroy by Pharaoh, and from the age of Yaakov (130) at the time of his death which is listed in the same verse. The point the Torah wished us to appreciate is that just as for the first seventeen years of his life Yaakov, his father, had provided for him, during the last seventeen years of his life, his son Joseph provided for his father.

ויחי יעקב, Jacob lived, etc. Although G'd had changed Jacob's name to Israel in 35,10, this is one of numerous instances when the Torah refers to him again as Jacob. I have explained that Jacob's permanent personality (נפש) had not changed as we know from Berachot 7 which interprets Psalms 46,9 where the word שמות, desolation, is re-interpreted to mean also שמות, names. The name Israel was an additional name reflecting spiritual highs that Jacob attained from time to time.

According to this approach we have to justify the word ויהי as a hint by the Torah that Jacob did not exploit all the good years of life on earth he could have enjoyed because he had caused Rachel's premature death when he uttered the oath that anyone who had stolen Laban's Teraphim should not live (31,32). Bereshit Rabbah 74,9 writes that the reason Jacob did not attain the age of his father Isaac (180), was that he lost 33 years of his life, a number corresponding to the numerical value of the word יחיה when he had said in 31,32 that the person who stole Laban's teraphim לא יחיה, should not live.

We are now left with the task of explaining why the Torah reports on the total of Jacob's years long before he was actually about to die, and before he had called in his sons to give them his last blessing. Perhaps the Torah wanted Jacob (and us) to become aware that he did not have the life expectancy of his father or his grandfather. This may have prompted him to call in his son Joseph order to make him swear that he would bury him in the land of Canaan. The patriarchs were all prophets and Jacob may well have been aware that he had forfeited 33 years of his life by his premature curse. As a result of this foreknowledge he called upon his son Joseph to visit him at that time in order to discuss burial arrangements.

If we look for some kind of allusion in the fact that Jacob enjoyed precisely 17 years in Egypt at the expense of his son Joseph who had become the provider of the family, it maybe that this number of years corresponded to the number of years Jacob himself had provided for Joseph before the latter had been sold into slavery by his brothers. It is also interesting that the number 17 is equal to the numerical value of the word טוב, good. Perhaps the Torah hints that Jacob experienced a repayment of the good he had done for Joseph while the latter grew up, when his son now repaid him with an equal number of years.

We do need to examine the criteria which cause the Torah to refer to Jacob sometimes as "Jacob" and other times as "Israel." It is a fact that when these names are applied to the Jewish people as a whole, the name Jacob reflects some deficiency in the Jewish nation, whereas the name Israel reflects the fact that the nation lived up to its potential on the occasions when it is described by that name. This principle has been alluded to in the Zohar 210 on Parshat Balak. The reason given there cannot be applied to Jacob the individual, however, inasmuch as he lived a righteous life at all times.

We must remember that Jacob strove to attain a very high degree of sanctity, one which is reflected in his name Israel. Spiritual highs are attainable only when one simultaneously frees oneself of such human concerns as pain, anguish, anger, etc. The kind of sanctity Jacob strove for needed to be based on the attainment of a degree of serenity in his earthly life, something that we nowadays experience only on the Sabbath, a day that G'd has imbued with the quality of מנוחה. He gave us an additional soul in order to appreciate that day to the full, and in order to help us to disregard all the depressing phenomena we have to deal with during the 6 days preceding the Sabbath. The reason we are able to do this is because the מנוחה emanates in the higher spiritual regions. This is why G'd Himself called the Sabbath עונג, delight. Whenever Jacob experienced the kind of spiritual serenity we are meant to experience every Sabbath, he qualified for the name Israel. The Torah therefore informs us about all these occasions by referring to him by his additional name. Whenever Jacob experienced worries, etc., this serenity departed from him similar to the departure of the נשמה יתרה from every Jew at the end of the Sabbath. At such times the Torah reverts to referring to our patriarch as being merely "Jacob."

I shall make a short list of instances where the respective names of Jacob and Israel clearly reflect different frames of mind of Jacob/Israel. In Genesis 35,10 where G'd tells Jacob for the first time that though his name remains Jacob he will henceforth also be entitled to the name Israel, the reason that G'd emphasised that at that time his name was still Jacob is that he had just heard about the death of his mother Rivkah (compare Bereshit Rabbah 82, which understands the words: "He (G'd) blessed him" in 35,9 as the blessing one extends to mourners). This is why the name Jacob continues to appear throughout this paragraph. The time when Rachel died (immediately afterwards according to the report in the Torah) was also a period during which Jacob could not qualify for the additional name Israel. The Torah (35,20) speaks about Jacob erecting a tombstone on the site where Rachel died and was buried. As soon as the thirty days of mourning had passed, we find that G'd called Jacob "Israel" in 35,21 where he is described as continuing his journey towards reunion with his father. When we find Jacob's children referred to as "the sons of Jacob" instead of as "the sons of Israel" in 35,22, this does not contradict what we have written, as the Torah merely wants to inform us that Israel's children were not on the same spiritual level as their father. The fact that Reuben was guilty of a misdemeanour with Israel's concubine at that time, is clear evidence of that. When the reunion between Isaac and his son Jacob is described in 35,27, the reason that Jacob is not called Israel is simply that it would not be good manners for the son to be called by a name which suggests a higher spiritual level than that of his father Isaac. You will find confirmation of this thought in Yalkut Shimoni item 875 on Psalms 116,15 "that the death of His faithful is precious to the Lord," where the author writes: "if Abraham had been alive at that time, how could his son Isaac have exercised any authority?" The same argument applied to all the other patriarchs. The above teaches that while one's illustrious father or teacher is alive, the son or disciple is not allowed to outshine him. This is why the Torah refers to Jacob as Jacob at that time. When we read about Jacob settling in the land of Canaan in 37,1 he is again called Jacob to remind us that during all the years he remained in the land of Canaan his life was full of mental anguish with very brief exceptions. One such exception was his relationship with Joseph before the latter was sold into slavery. This is why the Torah speaks of that relationship as "Israel loved Joseph, etc." The name Israel is used by the Torah only three times from the time Joseph was sold until 45,28 after Jacob had regained a measure of Holy Spirit as stated in 45,27 ותחי רוח יעקב אביהם, "their father Jacob's spirit revived." The three instances during the period between the sale of Joseph and Jacob's receiving the news that he was alive and well are 43,6: "Israel said: 'why did you harm me,'etc,"--43,8: "Yehudah said to Israel his father, etc." and 43,11: "Their father Israel said to them, etc." In all those instances Jacob spoke to his sons as a person who exercised his position of authority; this is why the Torah describes him with his full title "Israel." In those instances Jacob/lsrael had to assert his authority when he noticed that his sons did not give due consideration to their father's anguish. By acting as "Israel" he indicated that he would not forgive them if they did not heed his words. As soon as Jacob heard the news about Joseph he is referred to repeatedly as the "Israel" of old. This situation continues until Jacob/lsrael is told that he has to remain in Egypt, i.e. in exile. From then on the Torah called him Israel only at the moment of his reunion with Joseph or when the Torah referred to his sons. During the period Jacob dwelled in Egypt the Torah generally calls him Jacob until shortly before his death. It was important that his sons and family should remember that they had lost not merely a Jacob but an Israel. Besides, as Jacob prepared for death, his mind became filled with other-worldly concerns. It was therefore easy for him to attain the serenity needed to be Israel once more. The Zohar first section, 218 elaborates on the spiritual growth of the human soul shortly before its death in connection with "Israel prostrating himself at the head of the bed" during the period described in the Torah as "the days approached when Israel was to die," (47,29 and 47,31). All of this is the plain meaning of these verses. They do have implications of a more profound and mystical nature, however.

ויחי יעקב בארץ מצרים, Jacob lived in the land of Egypt, etc. Why did the Torah have to tell us once more that Jacob was in Egypt? Besides, all the Torah had to write was: 'ויהי ימי יעקב וגו, "Jacob lived to be 147 years old." This information would have allowed us to calculate that he lived in Egypt for the last 17 years seeing that he had told Pharaoh that he was 130 years old when he came to Egypt (47,9). Furthermore, why did the Torah have to repeat שני חייו, the years of his life?

Perhaps all of this is connected to the fact that Jacob's life was never smooth from the moment of his birth when he held on to the heel of his twin brother. His adversary Esau grew up alongside him; thereafter he lived a life of constant tension with his uncle Laban for 20 years. Not much later he experienced the anguish of Dinah's rape to be followed by Joseph's disappearance. For all these reasons the Torah tells us that the only 17 years Jacob lived a relatively serene life were the last 17 years of his life in Egypt. The Torah underlines that these were the only years which Jacob could really be described as having enjoyed by writing ויהי ימי יעקב שני חייו, "these years were full of חיים, life." These 17 years were truly ימי יעקב, "Jacob's years."

We have a tradition based on Tana de bey Eliyahu Rabbah chapter 5 that when someone concludes his life on earth in a happy frame of mind his entire life may be considered as having been a happy one. This is also the meaning of Job 8,7: והיה ראשיתך מצער ואחריתך ישגה מאד, "though your beginning was full of pain, your end will be a great achievement." Solomon has expressed a similar thought in Kohelet 7,8 when he said that "a good ending is better than a good beginning." When the Torah speaks of ויחי יעקב, this means that the last 17 happy years which Jacob lived in Egypt made his entire life, i.e. שני חייו appear as years during which he had lived to the full. The Torah chose the word ויהי which always signifies some painful experience to tell us that though there had been many painful experiences in Jacob's life on earth they were all converted to positive experiences in light of his last seventeen years in Egypt.

We need to consider why the Torah enumerates the years of Jacob's life in a different manner from the way it enumerated the lives of Abraham and the other patriarchs. When the Torah told us about the number of years Abraham lived, it commenced with the larger unit first, i.e. 100 years plus seventy years plus five years (compare Genesis 25,7). We find the same thing in Genesis 35,28 when Isaac's life is described; the same also is the case when the Torah described the number of years Sarah lived (Genesis 23,1). Perhaps the reason that the Torah reversed this in Jacob's case is to drive home the point that Jacob's last 17 good years were the key to his whole life.

Perhaps the Torah actually wanted to pinpoint 47 years of Jacob's life as the ones during which he experienced what we are in the habit of calling happiness. This is based on the interpretation of the verse in Genesis 37,3 that וישראל אהב את יוסף מכל בניו. According to the Zohar both Jacob's love for Rachel his true mate and Joseph is lumped together in this verse as indicated by the extra word את. As long as Joseph had not been born Jacob dressed in sackcloth [a figure of speech denoting he had not yet begun to experience what he perceived to be his true destiny. Ed.] When computing the number of years Jacob was married to Rachel and the 17 years prior to Joseph's disappearance, one must consider that some of these years overlapped as Rachel was alive until the birth of Benjamin 6 years after the birth of Joseph. Jacob was married to Rachel for 13 years during his stay at Laban. He experienced 11 years in the company of Joseph before the latter was sold making a total of 24 years. When you add to this the 17 years he lived in Egypt you get a total of 41 years of happiness in Jacob's adult life. When you add the first 6 years of Jacob's childhood, years that are not yet clouded by the various problems we experience in life, we have a total of 47 years of Jacob's life during which he could be considered as having lived a "normal" life. The Torah may have wanted to draw our attention to this fact and therefore it mentions these 47 years before mentioning the numerically bigger number, i.e. the 100 years.

באורח צדקה חיים ודרך נתיבה אל מות. “The road of righteousness (charity) leads to life, by way of its path there is no death” (Proverbs 12,28).

In this verse Solomon wishes to extol the virtue of charity in the wake of which much reward may be expected; in fact, the performance of that good deed may add years to one’s life (compare Psalms 19,12). The practice of charity is a panacea for both body and soul. It is capable of overcoming what is in store for people based on the mazzal they have been born under. We have proof of this in Samuel I 26,10 where David speaks of: “or his time will come and he will die.” What he meant was that the person’s day of death will approach sooner than had been originally scheduled. Death may sometimes occur sooner than originally scheduled, such as in the case of David of whom we read in Kings I 2,1 “David’s days approached to die.” On the other hand, there are instances when years are added to the life of a person who had been born under horoscopic influences which presaged a much shorter life for him. The best known example of this was the King Chiskiyah who, though he had been told by the prophet Isaiah to make his last will and testament, was granted an additional 15 years in response to his prayer (Isaiah 38,4-8). Conversely, we find that the life span of a person may be shortened from what had originally been decreed for him as we find in the case of King Yehoram son of Achazyah who was punished for his idolatry. We find in Kings II 1,16 that Elijah told him: “because you sent messengers to inquire of Baal-Zevuv the god of Ekron — as if there were no G’d in Israel whose word you could seek — assuredly you shall not rise from the bed which you are lying on but you shall die.” This is what prompted Solomon to say that charity is such a powerful virtue that it can overcome even decrees of death. Its power is equal to that of “being fruitful and multiplying.” The word חיים in the sequence בארח צדקה חיים means that an additional life span may be granted in recognition of the charity one practices. The word מות, “death,” in the second half of our verse refers to shortening someone’s life expectancy as retribution for some sin committed. We are told in Baba Batra 11 that a certain righteous individual Binyamin, who was in charge of the distribution of public charity once had a certain woman approach him during a year of famine. The woman said to him: “please support me!” He answered her that there were no funds left in the kuppah. Thereupon she said to him: “if you do not provide me with food, a woman and her seven children will surely die.” He then gave her of his own money. Some time later, this very Binyamin fell sick and was on the point of death. At that point the angels said to G’d: “did You not say that anyone who keeps alive even a single Jew is considered as if he had kept a whole world alive? Did not this Binyamin save the lives of a woman and her seven children? Why does he have to die so young?” Thereupon the decree ordering his death was torn up and he had 22 years added to his life span. The words ודרך נתיבה אל מות mean that because a person is performing constant acts of charity he may be certain that he does not die prematurely. Translated literally: “there is no death on its path.” This idea is expressed also by Proverbs 10,2 צדקה תציל ממות, “charity saves from death.” This means that the person who practices charity does not die before his appointed time thanks to his acts of charity. Seeing that on occasion acts of charity are the reason why someone’s life span is extended beyond what was originally decreed, it is only logical that such acts protect the person performing them against dying prematurely. The subject matter of charity, how to practice it, and in what amount to practice it is quite complicated; the fundamental ingredient of doing charity is that one gives to someone else something which belongs to one. There are many ways of doing this. A minimal performance of the commandment would be giving a small alms to a Gentile. The next higher level of charity would be giving a similar amount to a Jewish person from another town who is in need. A still higher level of charity is giving this amount to a needy Jew from your own city. This is based on Exodus 22,24 “the poor person who lives amongst you.” A poor person residing in your house takes precedence in his claim on your charity over someone who lives out of town. A poor person who is also a next of kin takes precedence over another poor person of your hometown. The relevant verse in Isaiah 58,7 states: “do not ignore your own kin.” A still higher level of charity is to provide one’s children with a livelihood. Our sages (Ketuvot 50) applied to this Psalms 106,3 “Happy are those who do right at all times.” They argued that it is not possible to do right at all times as most people do not become called upon to perform acts of charity all the time. The only way they can fulfill what the psalmist talks about is by providing for their children while they are minors. The next higher level of performing charity is looking after one’s aged parents financially. By doing this one also fulfills the commandment to honour father and mother. This is the finest way of doing charity. When one does this one may be in line for living to a ripe old age oneself. This is why the Torah wrote in connection with this commandment (Exodus 20,12) “in order that you may experience long life on the earth that the Lord your G’d is assigning to you.” This is precisely what Solomon termed בארך צדקה חיים, that the path to life is righteousness. G’d repays measure for measure. If children keep their parents alive longer by ensuring that they can enjoy their old age, G’d in turn will recompense the children in a similar manner. We see a perfect example of this principle in the relationship between Yaakov and Joseph. Yaakov had provided for Joseph during the first 17 years of his life; in our Parshah we are told that Joseph repaid his father by providing for him during the last 17 years of his life. This is why the Torah (Genesis 47,28) was at pains to write: “Yaakov lived in Egypt for 17 years.” [Had the Torah not wanted to make this point it could simply have written that Yaakov lived for a total of 147 years. We know that he was 130 years old when he was presented to Pharaoh. Ed.]

ויהי ימי יעקב שני חייו שבע שנים וארבעים ומאת שנה “the years of Yaakov’s life were one hundred and forty-seven years.” This Parshah is “closed,” i.e. we do not have the customary separation of words, lines or letters between the last portion and this one. There are two reasons for this. 1) The exile was about to start and the hearts of the Israelites became “closed” due to the progressively increasing difficulties in their daily lives. 2) Yaakov wanted to compensate for their feeling that a deterioration in their lives was about to take place by revealing to them the glorious future in store for them after the redemption. However, he was unable to do so. In other words, Yaakov’s channels of communication with the celestial regions had become “closed.” He had announced that he would reveal to them “what will befall you in the end of days” (49,1). When reading what follows it becomes clear that this is not what Yaakov announced. The “end of days” Yaakov had in mind was the exile in which we find ourselves now, not the exile in Egypt or Babylon. Seeing that Yaakov was the third of the patriarchs it is reasonable that his life should have foreshadowed experiences of the Jewish people during their third exile, i.e. our exile. At any rate, G’d would not let him reveal these matters and even Daniel (Daniel 12,9) states that these matters remained sealed secrets until the end of that exile. Our sages felt that Daniel had known about these developments and that is why the angel had to tell him to obscure the matter (Daniel 12,4). Isaiah said something similar in Isaiah 9,6 where we read: לםרבה המשרה ולשלום אין קץ. The final letter ם in the middle of the word לםרבה where we should have had a regular “open” letter מ, is a warning that whatever the areas in which Israel excels, these will not be in evidence during their exiles. The prophet seems to be saying that even attempts to hasten the redemption through Torah-study, through establishing G’d’s authority on earth, etc., will not affect G’d’s timetable. It is interesting that we find exactly the reverse phenomenon in the Book of Ezra (Nechemyah 2,13) where an open letter מ appears at the end of a word, i.e. בחומות ירושלים אשר המ פרוצים, “the walls of Jerusalem which are broken down.” A Midrash comments on this verse that this is an allusion that whereas when the walls of Jerusalem which are now “open,” i.e. broken down, were still “closed,” i.e. intact, such as during the period of the Temple, G’d’s authority which had been “closed”, i.e. not in evidence during that period, will re-emerge and reassert itself as a result of the Jewish people learning their lesson during a harsh exile. Just as the two letters מ in the verses we have quoted from Isaiah and Nechemyah respectively contain allusions to matters hidden from us, so the unusual absence of a division between the two portions Vayigash and Vayechi also contain allusions to matters hidden from us, i.e. hidden from Yaakov. There is a Midrash according to which Yaakov saw that the names of his twelve sons [the future tribes of Israel. Ed.] contained between them all the letters of the alphabet except the letters ח and ט. He concluded that this was a hint that none of these sons were guilty of a sin (chet.) This prompted him to reveal to them what he knew about the period preceding the final redemption. When he re-examined the letters in the names of the sons and realized that the letters ק and צ also did not appear in the names of any of them, he reconsidered and decided that his sons were not fit to have this information revealed to them. He therefore desisted, and this is why this portion is “closed.”

שבע עשרה שנה. “seventeen years.” This is something we already knew from when Yaakov had told Pharaoh that he was 130 years old. If the Torah enumerates the total number of years Yaakov lived in this verse this is another reason to see allusions in these numbers, in this information. We know that the Torah does not contain a single superfluous sentence, word, or even letter. In this verse the Torah alludes to the number of years Yaakov lived or did not live as an example of how G’d deals with us on the basis of מדה כנגד מדה, measure for measure.

ויחי יעקב בארץ מצרים שבע עשרה שנה, the commentators point out that just as Joseph was under the protection of his father for the first 17 years of his life, so his father was under Joseph’s protection for the last 17 tears of his life.

AND JACOB LIVED IN THE LAND OF EGYPT SEVENTEEN YEARS. I have already mentioned (Above, 43:14.) that Jacob’s descent into Egypt alludes to our present exile at the hand of the “fourth beast,” (In Daniel’s vision concerning the Four Kingdoms, the fourth beast symbolizes Rome. See Daniel 7:7, also Note 8 in Seder Vayeitzei.) which represents Rome. [There are many parallels,] for it was Jacob’s sons themselves who, by the sale of their brother Joseph, caused their going down there. Jacob, moreover, went there on account of the famine, thinking to find relief with his son in the house of his son’s friend, for Pharaoh loved Joseph and considered him as a son. It was their hope to ascend from there as soon as the famine would cease in the land of Canaan, just as they said, To sojourn in the land we have come, for thy servants have no pasture for their flocks, for the famine is heavy in the land of Canaan. (Above, 47:4.) But then they did not come up, but instead the exile prolonged itself upon Jacob and he died there, and his bones ascended from there accompanied by all the elders and courtiers of Pharaoh, who instituted severe lamentation for him. Our relationship with our brothers Rome and Edom is similar. We ourselves have caused our falling into their clutches, as they (The Hasmonean rulers during the Second Temple era. See Abodah Zarah 8b.) made a covenant with the Romans, and Agrippa, the last king during the Second Temple, fled to them for help. It was due to famine that Jerusalem was captured by the Romans, and the exile has exceedingly prolonged itself over us, with its end, unlike the other exiles, (It was known that the Babylonian Exile would last for a period of seventy years, (Jeremiah 25:12; II Chronicles 36:21). There was also a terminus known for the Egyptian Exile, (above 16:13).) being unknown. We are in it as the dead, who say, “Our bones are dried up, we are completely cut off.” (See Ezekiel 37:11.) But in the end they will bring us from all the nations as an offering to the Eternal, (Isaiah 66:20.) and they will be in deep sorrow as they will behold our glory, and we will see the vengeance of the Eternal. May He raise us, that we may live in His presence. (Hosea 6:2.)

ויחי יעקב AND JACOB LIVED — Why is this section (Sidra) totally closed? Because, comprising as it does an account of the death of Jacob, as soon as our father Jacob departed this life the hearts and eyes of Israel were closed (their eyes became dim and their hearts troubled) because of the misery of the bondage which they then began to impose upon them. Another reason is: because he (Jacob) wished to reveal to his sons the date of the End of Days (i.e. when Israel’s exile would finally end; cf. Rashi on Genesis 49:1), but the vision was closed (concealed) from him (Genesis Rabbah 96:1).

ויחי schließt sich unmittelbar dem Vorhergehenden an, ohne die sonst gewöhnliche פרשה-Abteilung. Wenn man bedenkt, daß die hiermit eingeleiteten siebzehn Jahre die einzigen waren, die Jakob ruhig durchlebte, sie somit, seinem ganzen vergangenen Leben gegenüber, als die eigentliche Blüte desselben betrachtet werden dürften, so hätte man umsomehr erwarten können, deren Erzählung werde durch einen besonderen Abschnitt hervorgehoben sein. Dessen Abwesenheit jedoch lehrt uns, daß diese siebzehn Jahre wohl individuell mitzählen, national jedoch gerade die minderbedeutenden waren, daß vielmehr die Jahre des getrübten, gedrückten Lebens, in welchen die Prüfung zu bestehen war, mitten im herbsten Jakobgeschicke sich den Namen Jisrael zu erwerben und dessen würdig zu werden, diejenigen gewesen, in welchen Jakob seine ewige nationale Bedeutung errungen, und für welche die hier folgenden siebzehn Jahre nur den heiter lohnenden Abschluss bilden.

Daher auch das eigentümliche ויהי ימי. Jakobs ganzes Lebensbild war ein einheitliches. שני חייו scheint, in Hinblick auf Jakobs bescheidene Äußerung über seinen Lebensinhalt, dieselbe wahrheitsgetreu rektifizieren zu sollen. Es waren nicht bloß מגוריו, die nur wenig חיים zählten, vielmehr waren alle Tage seiner Wanderschaft auf Erden Jahre wirklichen und wahrhaftigen Lebens. — Daß wir bei kleinen Zahlen das Gezählte im Plural, bei großen im Singular ausdrücken, hat vielleicht darin seinen Grund: bei einer kleineren Mehrheit stellen sich dem Auge und den Gedanken die einzelnen mehr in ihrer Individualität dar, während bei großer Anzahl sich mehr die Gesamtsumme hervorstellt, die den gemeinsamen Charakter der gezählten Objekte trägt. Wir sagen: חמשה אנשים und עשרים איש, ,"fünf Männer" und "zwanzig Mann".

Why is this portion completely closed... I.e., we have a tradition from Ezra the Scribe that Parshas Vayechi begins a new section and is not in the same parshah with the preceding verse וישב ישראל. Yet, a “closed” parshah usually has [a blank space in front of it] the measure of nine letters, while here it is completely closed with no space.

And hearts of Israel were “closed” because of the hardships of the bondage for they began... I.e., they were not yet in actual bondage, but had the “hardship” of bondage. Pharaoh requested them to [voluntarily] serve him, as it says in Sotah 11b that בפרך (Shemos 1:13) means בפה רך, “with a soft mouth.” In the beginning, the Egyptians enslaved them with a soft mouth.

An alternate explanation: Because he wished to reveal the End... You might ask: According to the first explanation, it should be “closed” [not here but] in the verse where it is written that Yaakov died (49:33). And according to the alternate explanation, it should be “closed” in the verse, “Gather around and I will tell you... the end of days” (49:1). The answer is: In the middle of the parshah it would not be noticeable that it is “closed,” since it is usually “closed” there, so we would not know [that we should make] these expositions. And here Scripture enumerates Yaakov’s years, so it is considered the place where he died. And [this as well answers the explanation of] “reveal the End”: Yaakov assumedly would not reveal the End until close to his death, and here is the place of his death, as Rashi explains. Therefore, [the basis for Rashi’s interpretations] is evident. Maharshal writes that there is a question on the first explanation: This parshah does not mention the bondage. Why then was Parshas Shemos not “closed”? Therefore Rashi brings the alternate explanation. And there is a question on the alternate explanation: Why is it not “closed” at the section of (49:1), “Yaakov called for his sons... gather around and I will tell you...”? Therefore Rashi brings also the first explanation.

Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years. During this time, the economic reforms described in the previous section (verses 14–26) were instituted, and the famine ceased. The days of Jacob, the years of his life, were seven years and one hundred atnd forty years.

ויחי יעקב, “Yaakov lived (peacefully), etc.” The descent of Yaakov to Egypt is meant to be reminiscent of the third exile of the Jewish people, the exile under Roman domination, as the sons of Yaakov had brought about their exile in Egypt themselves through having sold their brother Joseph to Egypt. Yaakov descended there under the impression that he would be saved there due to his beloved son occupying such an illustrious position in a country that was not severely damaged by the famine. The brothers themselves had declared that they had only come to Egypt for a brief stay, expecting to return to Canaan as soon as the famine had come to an end. In the event, this is not how things worked out, the exile in Egypt dragged on for one reason or another, and even Yaakov himself was only brought back to the land of Israel after he died, and even that only because Joseph told Pharaoh that his father had made him swear not to bury his remains in Egypt. While it is true that he was buried with great honour and the elite of Egypt participated in his funeral, his death put an end to any chance of the brothers returning even if they had wanted to. Something very similar happened during the later years of the Hasmonean reign when two brothers vied for the position of King, and the one who did not succeed by his own strength, called in the Romans to support him politically and militarily. They did, but they never left the country again after King Agrippas took refuge with them. Eventually, due to famine in Jerusalem after years of siege, the defenders of Jerusalem were captured and until this day we are enduring this ”Roman” exile. In contrast to previous exiles, we have no idea when this exile will come to an end. Who knows how far off is the day when the tables will be turned and we will go up to Jerusalem and offer offerings of thanksgiving, and all the nations will witness the redemption of the Jewish people. Rashi explains that the reason why this portion has not been separated from the previous portion by even the space of a single letter, is to allude to the fact that as soon as Yaakov had closed his eyes for the last time, the ability of the Jewish people to look into the future with any sense of confidence and assurance had vanished. This remained true although, according to tradition, the Egyptians did not commence any repressive measures against the Jewish tribe until after the last one of the brothers had died. The enslavement commenced immediately after the death of the last surviving brother Another approach to the peculiar lack of the separation of the previous portion in the Torah from this one, is that before the Torah had commenced with the chronology of the years of the life of Yaakov who was 130 years old when he came to Egypt, now the Torah relates that he had 17 years left to live out his life while in Egypt, and the Torah did not want to interrupt its chronology. [Joseph spent the first 17 years of his life under the care of his father, whereas his father spent the last 17 years of his life under the care of Joseph. Ed.]

“Jacob lived” [47:28]. King Solomon said: “the road of righteousness leads to life” [Proverbs, 12:28]. Whoever gives charity lives long and is knowledgeable that life depends on the disposition of stars, on stars in heaven. When one has a good constellation [mazal], he lives long. When he has an evil mazal, he has a short life. However, charity is greater than the constellations. Concerning this, our sages said that charity is very important; it reaches to the Throne of Glory. That is, charity is higher than the constellations. When the constellation decrees that a person should die, charity comes and causes him to live long. We also find this in the Torah portion that Joseph sustained Jacob with food for seventeen years. Jacob was worthy of this because he had sustained Joseph for seventeen years. Measure for measure. Joseph was seventeen years old when he was separated from his father. Therefore, the verse says, “Jacob lived seventeen years in the land of Egypt” [47:28]. That is to say, he lived in Egypt for seventeen years, that Joseph sustained him. His life was one hundred and forty-seven years. (Bahya, Genesis, Vayehi Introduction.) This portion is closed in the Torah scroll. There is no separation between one portion and the other, as is found between all the other Torah portions. The explanation is because the exile began in Egypt. That is, it became dark before the eyes of Israel. Therefore, the portion is stopped up. Another explanation is that Jacob wanted to tell his children about the end of the exile in advance. Now, the prophecy departed from Jacob. He was supposed to have told them when the Messiah would come. The Midrash writes that Jacob saw that the letters het and tet were missing in the names of his children. That is to say, no het and no tet. He wanted to tell them about the end of the exile and Jacob again saw that there was no kuf and no zadi, that is, kez [end]. Jacob again did not tell his children about the end. Therefore, the portion is stopped up. (Bahya, Genesis, 47:28.)

[2] And so all the righteous suffered in their youth and ultimately found comfort. Abraham suffered greatly in his youth, was thrown into a fiery furnace, and was cast out of his father's house. Sixteen kings came against him, and his wife was taken from him by both Pharaoh and Abimelech. He was tested with his only son, Isaac, but in the end found peace, as it says "And Abraham was old, well advanced in age; and the Lord had blessed Abraham in all things" (Genesis 24:1). Isaac also suffered greatly in his youth, as Ishmael took an arrow and tried to kill him. It says, "And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, playing with her son Isaac" (Genesis 21:9). "Playing" means he took an arrow and tried to kill him. Furthermore, his father Abraham was going to slaughter him, and then famine came, as it says, "Now there was a famine in the land" (Genesis 26:1). Isaac went to Abimelech and became the target of jealousy, as it says, "And the Philistines envied him" (Genesis 26:14). They told him to leave, and he went and settled in Gerar, where he disputed with the shepherds. But ultimately he found comfort, as it says, "Therefore he called it Rehoboth, for he said, 'For now the Lord has made room for us, and we shall be fruitful in the land'" (Genesis 26:22). Similarly, Jacob suffered greatly, as Esau pursued him, and he was enslaved by his sons. He was pursued by Laban and punished through his daughter. His son was sold, and in the end he found peace, as it says, "And Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years" (Genesis 47:28). Joseph was deeply pained when his brothers despised him, threw him into a pit, sold him into slavery, and he was imprisoned. As it is written, "They afflicted his feet with shackles; iron pierced his soul until his word came to pass and God's word proved him true" (Psalms 105:18-19). Joseph remained silent, as it is written, "He sits alone in silence" (Lamentations 3:28). In the end, he was redeemed, as it is written, "He will not abandon forever, for He desires to show kindness" (Lamentations 3:31). And it is written at the end, "Hurry and go up to my father" (Genesis 45:9).

“Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years; the days of Jacob, the years of his life, were one hundred and forty-seven years” (Genesis 47:28). “Jacob lived in the land of Egypt” – why is this portion more closed than any of the Torah portions? (Typically between Torah portions there is a nine-letter long space in the Torah scroll. Leading into the Torah portion of Vayḥi, which begins with this verse, there is merely a one letter space.) It is because once our patriarch Jacob died, the enslavement in Egypt began. (As a result, the children of Israel were trapped in a state of suffering.) Another matter, why is it closed [setuma]? It is because Jacob our patriarch sought to reveal the End of Days, and it was prevented [nistam] from him. Another matter, why is it closed? Because [God] shielded him from all the troubles of the world. (Jacob had suffered greatly over the course of his life, but during these seventeen years, he was shielded from troubles. )

(Gen. 47:28:) AND JACOB LIVED IN THE LAND OF EGYPT < SEVENTEEN YEARS >…. Why is this parashah more closed (Normally a new section (or parashah) has a space of nine letters, while a subsection begins after a space of three letters. This section begins after a space of one letter.) than all < other > parashiyyot? (Gen. R. 96:1.) Because, as soon as Jacob died, the servitude of Israel began. But another reason is that he desired to reveal the end of days, but it was closed off from him. (See below, 12:9; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 49:1.) And another reason is that he closed off all the troubles in the world from him.

Our forefather Jacob was 63 when he was blessed. Ishmael died at that time as is written, "Esau saw that Isaac had blessed...Jacob listened to his father...Esau saw [the Canaanite women] were bad [in the eyes of Isaac]...Esau went to Ishmael..."(Genesis 28:9). There seems no need for the verse to state "sister of Nebaioth." What do we learn from the fact that it says "sister of Nebaioth"? We learn that Ishmael died and Nebaioth [Ishmael's firstborn therefore] married off his sister to Esau. Jacob our forefather hid [from Esau] 14 years in the land of Israel and served Eber. Eber died two years after Jacob went to Aram-Naharaim. [Jacob] left and went to Aram-Naharaim and he was found by the well when he was 77 years old and he was in Laban's house for 20 years: 7 before he married any matriarchs, 7 from when he married in the Matriarchs and 6 years after the 11 tribes and Dinah were born. It comes out that all the tribes were born in seven years besides Benjamin. Each and every one each 7 months. He left Aram-Naharaim and came to Succoth and stayed there 18 months as is written "And Jacob went to Succoth" (Genesis 33:17). He left Succoth and went to Bet El and made 6 new encampments close to the place.

In Ezekiel’s vision of the Dry Bones, the dead cry out, “Our bones are dried up, we are cut off” (Ezek. 37:11). Ramban quotes this: “We live like the dead who say, ‘Our bones are dried up, we are cut off.’” (See Ramban to Genesis 47:28.) Ramban uses Ezekiel’s macabre imagery of the dying, who cry out their strangled despair, in order to give voice to the fate of Jews in exile in his own time. This is a life-in-death, a speaking muteness, which only God can hear.

Another Midrashic approach: The verse may be divided into the sections ויהיו חיי שרה, that the numerical value of the life of Sarah was equivalent to the numerical value of the word ויהיו, i.e. 37. These were the 37 years during which she was able to practice motherhood, having given birth to Yitzchak when she was 90 years old. The second part of the verse which mentions the number 127 records the number of years she lived not from her point of view but from an historian’s point of view. We find something similar when the Torah reports the years of Yaakov’s life in Genesis 47,28. The numerical value of the word ויחי is 34, i.e. a combination of the 17 years Yaakov enjoyed Joseph’s company after he had been born and the last 17 years of Yaakov’s life when he again enjoyed Joseph’s company. These 34 years were the only truly happy ones he experienced.

Rebbi dwelt in Sepphoris seventeen years and applied to himself (Gen. 47:28): “Jacob lived in Egypt seventeen years,” Jehudah lived in Sepphoris seventeen years. Of these he suffered from toothache for thirteen years. {Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, all these thirteen years no woman lying-in died in the Land of Israel and no pregnant woman had a miscarriage in the Land of Israel.} Why did he have a toothache? Once he saw a calf to be slaughtered when it bellowed and said to him, Rebbi, save me! He said to it, for that you were created. At the end, how was he healed? He saw them killing a burrow of rats. He said to them, let them live, it is written (Ps. 145:9) “His mercy extends to all His creatures.”

Rebbi dwelt in Sepphoris seventeen years and applied to himself (Gen. 47:28): “Jacob lived in Egypt seventeen years,” Jehudah lived in Sepphoris seventeen years. Of these he suffered from toothache for thirteen years. {Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, all these thirteen years no woman lying-in died in the Land of Israel and no pregnant woman had a miscarriage in the Land of Israel.} Why did he have a toothache (Parallel in Babli Baba Meẓi‘a 85a. There, the calf ran to hide itself in Rebbi’s garment but did not talk to Rebbi. In the parallel Gen.rabba 33(3), the calf is said to have been bellowing “as if to say, save me!”) ? Once he saw a calf to be slaughtered when it bellowed and said to him, Rebbi, save me! He said to it, for that you were created. At the end, how was he healed? He saw them killing a burrow of rats. He said to them, let them live, it is written (Ps. 145:9) “His mercy extends to all His creatures.”

The hundred and forty-seven psalms (The number of Psalms in the Heb. Bible is 150; but, according to Rabbinic opinion, I and II, IX and X, CXXXIV and CXXXV are each reckoned as one Psalm.) included in the Book of Psalms correspond to the number of years of Jacob. (Cf. Gen. 47, 28.) This is intended to teach you that all the praises which Israel offer to the Holy One, blessed be He, correspond to the number of years of our father Jacob. What is the reason? (GRA inserts the question.) [Scripture states,] Yet Thou art holy, O Thou that art enthroned upon the praises of Israel. (Ps. 22, 4. Israel is synonymous with Jacob.)

Yaakov lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years. The days of Yaakov, the years of his life were one hundred and forty seven years.

And Jakob lived in the land of Mizraim seventeen years. And the sum of the days of Jakob, of the days of his life, was a hundred and forty and seven years.

Only this shall be befitting us when (V. L.: for… to be not.) all our engagements with mundane affairs are not for their own sake but in order to vivify the souls, the portions of G–d, and to supply what they lack out of gratuitous kindness. For thereby we give the form (The creature (man).) a semblance to its Former (The Creator.—Cf. Bereishit Rabbah 27:1.) —“the L–rd is One,” for the chesed of G–d endures at all time (Psalms 52:3 (cf. Rashi, ad loc.).) —a true chesed  (Chesed shel emet, in Hebrew, signifying a gratuitous kindness (cf. Rashi on Genesis 47:29), continuous, ceaseless, and absolute (cf. Likkutei Torah, Massei 93b-c).) —to animate the universe and all that fills it, every single moment. It is just that according to the Torah a man’s wife and children take precedence over all others, (See Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 251.) except (From here to end of paragraph inserted according to L. H.) for the saints of that generation—who take precedence over one’s children and the saints of the Land of Israel take precedence over the saints in the Diaspora, (See Sifrei, Deuteronomy 116; Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 251 (see also Pitchei Teshuvah, ad loc., par. 4).) [aside of the fact that they did not leave anyone in the Diaspora comparable to themselves], (While the previous seems to be a general Halachic statement, these latter words appear to refer specifically to the Chasidic leaders (including the author’s master and colleague, R. Menachem Mendel of Vitebsk) who ascended to the Holy Land accompanied by their families and numerous followers.) and suffice this for the initiated.

...Rashi says the kindness you do with those that passed away is called true kindness becuase you're not expecting any reward. Ramban asks Rashi, by Eliezer, Avraham asked Eliezer to do kindness and truth with him, but there he wasn't passing away. It appears to me this how we should explain Rashi: there are some people who merit to have a very lofty soul at birth, while others, later on in life, can attain a lofty soul by doing a mitzvah with a good intention (as is known in Kabbalistic circles). So when you merit this soul (from your good intent), you attain more strength and power in your service of Hashem because these souls assist you. This is when the Talmud means when it says that "if someone wants to become pure, they assist him." "They" refers to those souls. It also says in the Talmud that "they tell him to finish the mitzvah." Who tells it to him? These souls which he has acquired tell him to finish the mitzvah. This is also the meaning of the Mishna: "your house should be a house where the wise men meet." As it says in the Torah, "with wisdom you can build a house." That is referring to the soul: what it means that by preparing your soul you will merit to have many souls of the wise." Like we find by the Ri M'Gash, he had many souls for the Tannaim in him, as the Arizal says. The Mishna continues "and you should drink their words with thirst" means that you will do mitzvot with passion, because they [the souls] will inspire him. This is meaning concerning the building of the Mishkan, "and all the wise-hearted among you will come and do." The wise-hearted refer to these souls that have become part of you; they will do all that G-d has commanded. Also in the possuk: all wise-hearted among will perform the task. What that means that is that these supernal souls will work with you to build the Mishkan with the deepest mystical intent. This is what Rashi means with kindness of truth: this means that these holy souls, which have passed away, what they do with you is a kindness of truth because their intent is certainly true, without expecting any ulterior motive.

ויקרא לבנו ליוסף, “he called for his son, for Joseph.” He did so, seeing that G-d had told him while he was on his way to Egypt that Joseph would be present when the time came for him to die, and that he would close his eyes for the last time. (46,4) Another reason was that the only reason why Yaakov had undertaken the journey down to Egypt had been in order to be near Joseph. It would therefore be appropriate that Joseph would accompany him on his ascent to the Holy Land to be buried with his ancestors.

שים נא ידך תחת ירכי, “please put your hand beneath my hip.” This method of swearing an oath was the equivalent of what a handshake is in our days.

ועשית עמדי חסד ואמת, “and perform for me an act of kindness and truth.” Wherever we find the expression חסד ואמת, it refers to giving someone more than he is entitled to expect, or asking him to do something beyond what he is entitled to demand. One such example is found in Samuel II 15,20: שוב והשב את אחיך עמך חסד ואמת, “go back and take your kinsmen with you and perform an act of loyalty and kindness (with them).” [David was in dire straits and staying with him was likely to result in the death of Ittai and his men. He was not obligated to remain faithful to David. Ed] Yaakov reminds Joseph that while it is his duty to bury his father, he is not entitled to demand of him to bring him to burial in the cave of Machpelah. He therefore pleads with him not to bury him in Egypt.

ויקרבו ימי ישראל למות, “Israel’s days of living approached their end;” wherever the expression קריבה, “approach,” is used in the Torah in connection with death, it signals that the person concerned died prematurely, i.e. before the time originally allocated to him at birth, or younger than the lifespan of his father. We find the same type of wording in Kings I 1,2 ויקרבו ימי דוד למות, where the approach of death of King David is discussed, the reason being that he did not live as long as his paternal forefathers Boaz, Oved, and Yishai Their combined lifetimes were over 400 years, whereas David died at the age of 70. (Compare B’reshit Rabbah 96,4)

ועשית עמדי חסד ואמת, “and perform for me an act of true kindness;” the reason why Yaakov used both the adjectives “kind, and true,” was that Joseph, as his son, was obligated to bury his father, whereas he was not obligated to transport his remains to the cave of Machpelah in the land of Canaan. Yaakov is aware that what he is asking is more than he has a right to ask of a person of such a high rank.

אל נא תקברני במצרים “please do not bury me in Egypt.” When Rashi explains Yaakov’s motivation as being that he foresaw that Egypt would be smitten with the plague of lice, etc., this does not sound plausible. He had no reason to fear that his remains would be affected by that plague, seeing that we have a tradition that even his son Binyamin was not affected by that plague; his father Yaakov surely would be even less affected by it. (Talmud tractate Baba Batra folio 17) In order for Rashi to be correct, we would have to assume that Yaakov was unaware that his son Binyamin and his descendants would not be afflicted by these lice, something that seems unlikely. One of Rashi’s grandsons, Rash’bam, claims that Yaakov wanted to prevent the Egyptians of being spared the ten plagues seeing that he had been buried in that soil. This would be due to his having been named Yisrael, which conferred a much higher spiritual status on him. (Compare Jeremiah 50,17 where he has been referred to as שה פזורה, “a scattered sheep,” as opposed to the Egyptians who are referred to by several of our prophets as donkeys, i.e. their flesh being described as similar to the flesh of donkeys. (Ezekiel 23,20) The Torah writes that the firstborn male donkey has to be redeemed by a שה, i.e. a sheep or lamb (Exodus 13,13) the implication being that only descendants of Yaakov can possibly serve as redemption for Egyptians. If that animal is not redeemed, it must be killed by its owner. (B’reshit Rabbah 96,5)

AND JACOB LIVED. The terms put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh and kindly and truly have been explained in the account dealing with Eliezer. (Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 27:2 and 24:49.)

ויקרבו ימי ישראל למות, Israel's time to die approached, etc. I have already explained whence Jacob knew that his death was close. Nachmanides writes that he knew this from a loss of vital signs in his body; I do not think that we can accept his theory for we know of many people who continue to live for many years after their old age sets in and they begin to feel weak.

Rabbi Luria's comparison also helps us understand Psalms 104,29: תוסף רוחם יגועון, "when you take away their breath they perish." The meaning of this statement had not been clear. Besides, one would have expected David to say: תוסף ברוחם. With the help of Rabbi Luria's introduction the meaning of the verse becomes crystal clear. When the end of man's life approaches and G'd gathers in all the remaining parts of the soul which used to commute to heaven nightly only to return to their bodies by morning, G'd will then collect the soul itself (not just the "sparks"). We have already explained elsewhere that the departure of the soul from the body at night is not something absolute; the soul continues to illuminate the body below with its "light;" we have proof of this in the well known phenomenon that when one awakens a sleeping person (in the middle of the night) the part of the soul which had ascended heavenwards is immediately perceived as present in the body of the person who has been awakened.

Having read what Rabbi Luria had to say on the subject of the soul we now appreciate that when the Torah described Jacob's life as drawing to its close by saying: "the days of Jacob's death approached," the meaning is the same as that in Psalms 104,29 except that here the Torah uses the expression למות instead of יגועון. The various parts of Jacob's soul which used to ascend nightly were now about to be gathered together for a final journey to heaven. Jacob felt that this process was taking place and this is why he called for Joseph to come and see him.

ויקרא לבנו ליוסף. "He called for his son, for Joseph." The reason Jacob only called upon Joseph is simple. Only Joseph possessed the power to carry out Jacob's wish to be buried in the cave of Machpelah. We do need to understand, however, why the Torah felt the need to add that Joseph was "his son;" do we not know this? Was there another person called Joseph so that we might have erred as to whom Jacob called? Furthermore, why did the Torah not merely write לבנו יוסף, instead of adding the letter ל by writing לבנו ליוסף?

The Torah may have wanted to explain the strange phenomenon of a commoner summoning the king instead of asking the king for an audience at his palace in the capital. We know that the halachah considers the dignity of a king as taking precedence over the dignity of one's teacher. The Talmud Kidushin 33 discusses the problem of how a father has to conduct himself vis-a-vis his son when the latter is his rabbi. Is the son who is also a rabbi obligated to rise in the presence of his father? Rabbi Yoshua ben Levi there opines that he himself does not need to rise in the presence of his son since he was greater than his son in Torah learning; since, however the son occupied a position of great prominence (he was the son-in-law of the prince (נשיא) he made a practice of rising in the presence of his son. I have already elaborated on this subject in my book Rishon Letzion (glossaries on the Yore De-ah 240, subsection 7). In any event, it is clear from the discussion in the Talmud that the honour due to the temporal power takes precedence over that due to one's father even if the son was not the temporal authority itself but only closely related to it. In view of this, how could Jacob arrogate to himself the right to summon Joseph to his home? In order to answer this question the Torah provides us with two answers. 1) Inasmuch as Joseph was his son, and 2) inasmuch as he was Joseph. One of these two reasons by itself would not have sufficed to give Jacob the right to summon Joseph. Had Joseph not been Jacob's son, the fact that Joseph loved him would not have been an adequate reason for Jacob to ignore etiquette and summon the king to his side. However, since Joseph did not only love Jacob as such but he was also his father and mentor and Joseph was a dutiful son, Jacob was able to ask him to come to him. The Torah writes לבנו, to stress that Joseph was known for his extraordinary devotion to his father. This is why his father knew that he would not stand on ceremony and would ignore etiquette. This in spite of the halachic ruling based on Kidushin 32 that when a king is willing to forego the honour due him he is not allowed to do so. The ruling in the Talmud applies only to a Jewish king who rules over Israel. A king of the type of Joseph is permitted to waive the honour due him if he feels the occasion demands it.

אם נא מצאתי חן, "If I have found favour in your eyes, etc." The word נא means both "please" and "now" in this instance. Jacob used the word in the sense of "now" to make Joseph realise that he knew he had already previously found favour in his son's eyes, why else would he have provided for him for the past 17 years. However, he now asked for an additional favour. This is why he said: "please." Had he not said "please," it might have sounded as if he had not been grateful for the sustenance Joseph had provided thus far.

Alternatively, Jacob indicated that although Joseph would no longer have to provide for him seeing he was about to die, there was another matter concerning which he needed Joseph's favour.

We may also read a more subtle meaning into this request. All the favours Joseph had done for Jacob in the past could have been interpreted in either of two ways. 1) Joseph did so because Jacob had found favour in his eyes and not because he expected any favours from his father in return. This was normal between a father and a son who were extremely fond of each other. 2) Joseph had done what he did merely because it was his duty as a son to look after his aging father something that is customary also amongst the Gentiles. It would simply have been a disgrace for a man in Joseph's position to make his family a charge on outsiders. Inasmuch as the motivation of Joseph's conduct up to this point had been subject to some doubt, the request Jacob was about to make from him now was one by means of which Joseph could demonstrate that he had done everything only because he loved his father not because he was performing a filial duty. If Joseph were to accede to his request he would prove that all he had done in the past had also been motivated solely by love for his father. Inasmuch as what Jacob asked Joseph to do now was something he was not obligated to do, if he were to decline to do so it would reflect on the motivations behind the favours he had done for his father up to now. This is also why Jacob spoke about מצאתי, "I have found," instead of אמצא "I will find."

שים נא ידך, "please place your hand, etc." In this instance the word נא may mean "please," or it may mean "now" in the sense of "after due consideration." Jacob added a second request to the one he had already indicated he was about to make that he be buried in the land of Canaan, namely that Joseph reinforce his promise by swearing an oath. The word also meant that Jacob was not content to wait until his death was imminent for Joseph to make this undertaking. He wanted the undertaking to be made on that very day. The fact that the next paragraph begins with the words: "it was after these events," makes it quite plain that the conversation the Torah reports here took place some considerable time before Jacob took ill (48,1) and Joseph was told about it by a third party (48,2). Jacob also wanted Joseph to render this oath immediately, before he had an opportunity to register a מודעה, a statement that the oath his father requested from him was to be considered as something he had committed himself to only under duress and should therefore not be binding upon him. Midrash Tanchuma even says that Jacob told Joseph that unless he swore an oath to him concerning this burial, he would die from mere worry that he would not be buried in the cave of Machpelah. If that was so, Joseph had additional reason to register a מודעה. Jacob therefore had to pre-empt such a possibility by insisting on an immediate and therefore irrevocable oath. All this is implied by the words: שים נא ידך, "put your hand now, etc."

ועשית עמדי חסד ואמת, "and do me a true favour!" The Torah added the conjunctive letter ו at the beginning of the word ועשית to indicate that the request for the oath had preceded the actual request to bury him in the land of Canaan.

Bereshit Rabbah 96,5 teaches that any favour performed for a person after his death is considered a "true favour." This is very difficult to understand as we observe Jacob promising Joseph an extra share in the land of Israel at the time the land would be distributed when he said: "I am giving you one portion more than your brothers which I took from the Emorites with my sword and my bow (48,22)." Rashi even explains that Jacob said: "because you have the bother to organise my burial, etc, I assign to you an extra share in the land of Israel, namely שכם." The fact that Jacob said נתתי, "I have given," indicates that he did so at the time when he had made Joseph swear the oath which he had categorised as חסד ואמת in 47,29 at the time Joseph accepted the task to bury his father. We may have to conclude that Jacob meant to reward Joseph already at that time for accepting the task to organise the funeral procession all the way to the land of Canaan and not for the burial in the cave of Machpelah itself. Even if this were correct, Jacob should not have added the word "ואמת."

Jacob may also have had an indication that his death was close at hand because the Zohar section 1,217 states that thirty days prior to one's death a person's צלם, divine image, is removed from him. The Zohar claims that Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai observed this phenomenon with Rabbi Yitzchak. Although such knowledge is withheld from ordinary people, righteous people do become aware of it as they are aware of most spiritual matters. Another indication that this may have been so is the syntax of the verse "the days for Israel to die approached;" since when do we describe days as "approaching?"

On the other hand, Jacob may have intended that Joseph should arrange matters in such a way that the fact that his father had awarded him an extra piece of territory should not be perceived by him as a payment for such a deed. This could be achieved by one of two means. 1) He asked Joseph not to bury him in a town filled with abominations, i.e. אל נא תקברני במצרים; 2) Joseph should transfer his earthly remains to the Holy Land. The חסד, kindness, Joseph was to perform was not to bury his father in Egypt; the normal sequence of death and burial is that one dies first and then one is buried. It is significant that Jacob first spoke about where he did not want to be buried, and only afterwards mentioned a word associated with dying when he said: "I wish to lie with my fathers." This indicates clearly that the oath Jacob made Joseph swear referred to where he was going to be buried, not to where he was not to be buried. Joseph would not receive a reward for either of these two requests so that what he did could be described as a true kindness. The extra town Jacob allocated to Joseph's (his tribe's) heritage in the land of Israel was only in respect of the effort and expense involved in transporting the remains of his father to the land of Canaan.

The verse may also be understood along the following lines: When Jacob said: ועשית, he meant that what Joseph had already done for him in the past was a חסד של אמת, a true kindness for which he had not and would not receive compensation. There was, however, another kindness Jacob would now ask of him for which he would receive the city of Shechem as a reward. We would then have to understand the letter ו in front of the word ועשית as referring also to what Joseph would do in the future. Once Joseph undertook to carry out his father's wish in return for compensation any oath he swore that he would do so could not be construed as an oath sworn under duress. There would be no legal way Joseph could become free from that oath except by carrying out its provisions (compare Rav Nissim on Nedarim 65). Although the text does not have Jacob mention the gift of Shechem at this point, the Torah does give a broad hint that Jacob had promised Shechem to Joseph already prior to 48,22 when the Torah makes mention of it. Jacob is not reported as saying that he would give that city to Joseph in the future, but the Torah reports him as saying: "I have already given you one portion more than to your brothers." The gift had been bestowed on Joseph at the time Jacob asked Joseph to render an oath concerning Jacob's burial arrangements in 47,30-31. We have explained the legal details about revocable and irrevocable oaths in connection with Isaac and Avimelech; see our commentary on Genesis 26,26. We must also remember Sotah 36 where it is stated that eventually Joseph had to threaten Pharaoh that he would consider himself free of his undertaking not to reveal that Pharaoh did not understand Hebrew unless the latter would let him honour his oath to his father to bury him in the land of Canaan. Joseph's argument there does not imply that he was legally able to renege on the oath to his father, he only used that argument to put the oath to his father on the same legal basis as that which he had rendered to Pharaoh, seeing that in both instances he had received compensation for rendering the oath.

אל נא תקברני במצרים, "please do not bury me in Egypt." The meaning of the words אל נא in this case refers to a time-frame. Jacob did not even want to be interred in Egypt temporarily. He wanted that his remains be transferred to the land of Canaan immediately. This is why he added ושכבתי עם אבותי, "I wish to lie with my fathers," adding ונשאתני "and you will transport me, etc." I have already explained the reason that Jacob had first said "do not bury me, etc." and only afterwards: "I wish to lie with my fathers, etc." on 47,29: "perform a favour for me." The Zohar Vayeshev 182 explains that Jacob and Joseph were so much part of the same category of souls and that this is why Jacob was afraid that when the time came for him to die, Joseph would not want to be separated from him until he himself would die. Although the Talmud Taanit 4 claims that Jacob did not die and remained alive, Jacob wanted to be sure that Joseph did not misunderstand this and that he realised that his father would "die." When that occurred he would be separated from Joseph and would want to join his fathers. This is why he had to issue all these instructions.

We can understand the meaning of this verse by accepting what the sainted Rabbi Yitzchak Luria (Ari zal ) wrote in his book Kohelet Yaakov. He writes as follows: "You know that the souls have been divided up into numerous "sparks" of sanctity. These are destined to inhabit human beings on their various appearances on earth. The length of time a person lives on earth is directly related to how many of these sparks of sanctity -also known as tzelem -inhabit his body. Every day such a person performs G'd's commandments the condition of one of these "sparks" is enhanced, thus strengtheneing such a persons צלם. Every day that such a person does not perform G'd's commandments his צלם suffers damage because one of these sparks has been damaged. Thus far Rabbi Luria.

This introduction is immensely valuable for those who want to examine matters connected with these phenomena in detail. By means of this paragraph in Rabbi Luna's book we can understand what the Talmud Berachot 57 meant when it states that sleep is equivalent to 1/60th of death. It means that every day one of these sparks escapes the body when a person goes to sleep. Such a loss of the spark is not clearly noticed by the soul as something absolute, however; the "spark" is merely detached from the main body of the soul and becomes intertwined with the lower form of the soul known as נפש, life-force. It is an act of kindness by G'd that every "spark" which acquired a merit on a particular day through the performance of a מצוה by the person whom it inhabits is further removed from loss of vitality in spite of the fact that said person may commit sins subsequently thereby producing defective "sparks." Moreover, when the errant person repents his sin G'd enables such sparks to be restored to their original level of vitality. All of this is part of the various ways in which G'd demonstrates His kindness towards us.

Keeping in mind the Ari zal's statement, we can understand why the complaint against G'd for having shortened man's lifespan after the deluge from around nine hundred years to less than one hundred years nowadays is not justified. Let us use the following parable to illustrate what occurred. A king distributed gems which had been mined in a quarry to various craftsmen in order to fashion from these gems intricate golden jewelry. He urged the various craftsmen to use all their skills to produce superior work and to complete it at a certain date. Different craftsmen were given different amounts of gems in accordance with the king's estimate of their ability to complete the task within the time allotted. When the time arrived for these craftsmen to present the result of their labours to the king, the king found to his dismay that not only had most of them not performed work of acceptable standards, but some of them had actually ruined many of the gems in the process. The king grew angry and killed these craftsmen. He showed the children of these craftsmen what happened to their parents and why, and he urged them not to repeat the mistakes of their parents. When the king handed the new generation of craftsmen gemstones to fashion into jewelry, he allocated to each one only approximately one tenth of the amount of gems he had allocated to the craftsmen of the previous generation. He believed that by making the task less demanding the craftsmen would have a better chance to perform excellent workmanship.

The souls G'd allocated to people are the gemstones referred to in the parable. This is the mystical dimension of Genesis 49,24: משם רועה אבן ישראל, that by means of the instruments placed at our disposal by G'd, i.e. the Torah and the commandments, we have been given the insights to conduct our lives in such a manner that the sparks making up the soul can be strengthened. The Zohar, part one section 82 describes that the condition of the soul is improved in proportion to the performance of good deeds and abstention from sins by the personality it inhabits. This is equivalent to the intricate jewelry described in our parable.

Originally, G'd assigned great tasks to the antediluvian generations and at the same time equipped them with commensurately greater souls, each one of which consisted of many "sparks." He assigned a single day to each "spark." This is alluded to in Exodus 16,4 when the Torah speaks about people collecting the manna on a daily basis, i.e. דבר יום ביומו. The word יום may be understood as ענף, a branch or sprout of each soul. G'd granted each human being a certain number of days, i.e. He allocated to them approximately 300.000 such gemstones as mentioned in the parable. After the failure which resulted in the deluge, all of this was restructured in order to help us achieve what is expected of us in a lifespan averaging seventy years.

We have benefited by this change in G'd's allocation of a shorter lifespan in additional ways. For instance, we observe that the process of aging results in people becoming progressively more frail, a process which even includes scholars (of secular disciplines). Infirmity in old age results in a person not being able to carry out fully the tasks allocated to him for each day he lives. While it is true -as our sages say at the end of tractate Kinim -that Torah scholars who have attained old age retain clear minds, the sages were careful with their wording. They stated that the minds of non-scholars decline progressively to such an extent that their minds gradually cease to function properly. It is clear that inasmuch as parts of the soul gradually disappear, the remaining parts of the soul are not up to the task of performing as if they were still whole. The same thing happens to the body so that gradually both body and mind deteriorate to the level of that of a minor.

With the help of Rabbi Luria's analysis we can also better understand Bereshit Rabbah 62,2 in which the difference between dying as a young man or dying at a ripe old age is described. Rabbi Yehudah explained: "when this light (soul) is extinguished by a natural process it is beneficial both for the light and the wick. If, however, it is extinguished by an unnatural process this is harmful both for the light and its wick." The Midrash compared the death of an aged person to the gradual extinction of a light. As the light gradually loses power, so the aged person's vital systems (נפש) decline progressively until finally he dies by appearing like a person who is merely asleep and who does not feel what is happening to him when his last remaining vestige of life leaves him.

ויקרבו ימי ישראל למות, “The time approached for Israel to die.” How did Yaakov know that his death was approaching? He realised that his strength was ebbing and this is why he wanted to make his last will in the presence of Joseph; however, at this stage he had not yet been taken ill. Later on, when he was taken ill (48,1) Joseph was informed of this. We find something similar before King David died. Kings I 2,1 speaks about “the time for David to die approached;” he himself said of himself: “I am going the way of all the earth” before giving his final instructions to his son Solomon. The plain meaning of why the Torah suddenly calls Yaakov by his alternate name Yisrael again instead of writing “the time approached for Yaakov to die,” (which would have been the natural sequence to the line: “Yaakov lived in the land of Egypt for seventeen years”) is that ever since he had been given the additional name the Torah uses both names interchangeably. Throughout our portion the names Yaakov and Yisrael are used intermittently. [The name “Yaakov” appears six times, whereas the name “Yisrael” appears thirteen times. Ed.] From a more rational/scientific point of view we may detect a distinct pattern in the Torah sometimes choosing to refer to Yaakov by his original name and sometimes by his additional name. The name Yaakov applies to the physical part of Yaakov’s personality, matters connected to his terrestrial existence, whereas the name Yisrael refers to spiritual aspects of his personality, matters connected to his eternal existence in celestial regions. When Yaakov had first been given the name “Yaakov” the Torah stated that this reflected his holding on to the heel of his brother Esau (Genesis 25,26). We find the name Yisrael first used in connection with Yaakov having successfully contended with the celestial force representing his brother Esau (Genesis 32,29). It is therefore clear that the additional name Yisrael was intended principally to reflect Yaakov’s spiritual accomplishments. Seeing that it is impossible for a human being while part of a body to divest himself totally of bodily needs and concerns, we can appreciate what our sages said that contrary to the name Avraham which replaced the name Avram, the name Yisrael did not replace the name Yaakov. It reflected the fact that this Yaakov had attained an additional dimension in his personality development (compare Berachot 13). The name Yaakov henceforth became subordinate to that of Yisrael. The use of these names teaches amongst other matters that if someone makes his spiritual dimension subordinate to his physical, terrestrial concerns this “kills” him, leads to his death sooner or later. This is what David had in mind when he said in Psalms 22,30: “all those who in full vigor shall eat and prostrate themselves, all those at death’s door whose spirit lag, shall bend the knee before Him.” David refers to people who make a point of first tasting all the pleasures of terrestrial life before prostrating themselves before G’d as having their priorities reversed. As a result, such people experience death in a very real sense of the word. In the verse we just quoted the word יכרעו, “they will bend the knee” does not refer to something similar to השתחוה, “prostrating” oneself (before G’d). Rather, it is similar to Psalms 20,9. In that psalm it is used as meaning falling down and not rising up again. This is the punishment for having had one’s priorities mixed up. When the people mentioned in Psalm 22 finally decide to “give to Caesar what is Caesar’s,” i.e. to also make an obeisance to G’d as an afterthought, it is too late. They had not lifted a finger to secure their share in eternity while there was time. Upon closer examination you will find that when the Torah employs the name Yaakov to describe our patriarch it refers to his terrestrial concerns, concerns which are indispensable for any human being, whereas when it switches by calling him Yisrael it refers to his spiritual concerns, matters which are largely abstract. This is what the prophet (Isaiah 43,1) had in mind when he said: ”who created you O Yaakov, who formed you O Yisrael?” In connection with the name Yaakov, the prophet only mentioned the word בריאה, a primitive kind of creation, whereas in connection with spiritual parts of man the prophet speaks of a more sophisticated product, one that has undergone יצירה, an advanced stage of formation. You will note that at the revelation of the Torah at Mount Sinai (Exodus 19,3) G’d says to Moses: “so shall you say to the house of Yaakov and relate to the children of Yisrael.” The name Yaakov referred to the women, the word Yisrael to the men. [Perhaps the fact that Adam had described Eve as “bones of my bones and flesh of my flesh,” but not as “spirit of my spirit” (Genesis 2,23), is the reason that woman symbolizes primarily the physical part of the human being. Ed.] Isaiah 43, 22 had something similar in mind when he wrote: “But you have not worshipped Me, O Yaakov, that you should be weary of me O Israel.” He meant that while you Yaakov were concerned with your terrestrial matters you did not really worship Me (even if you paid lip-service). As to worshipping Me as “Yisrael,” you indicated that it was too wearisome for you. When our Parshah commences by referring to Yaakov’s existence on earth by calling him Yaakov (twice in 47,28), this is in keeping with what we have explained. In 47,29 however, when the Torah commences to speak of “death” of the body, it switches to using the name “Yisrael” seeing that the death of a righteous person is but the necessary preamble to his taking his place in eternal life in the celestial spheres. Whenever preparations for death are described, including the very mention of the bed on which Yaakov lay sick, the Torah describes him as Yisrael. As soon as the Torah finishes describing his preparations for the life in the hereafter by blessing Joseph and his brothers, it reverts to the use of the name Yaakov. The Torah never describes Yaakov as having died. Only Yisrael is described as having died. The embalmers are described as embalming Yisrael (50,1). As soon as Yaakov had made the physical preparations for death, i.e. “he gathered in his feet to the bed,” the Torah calls him Yisrael again. As of that moment he had entered eternal life. When we find in 49,1 that the Torah refers to Yaakov suddenly again as Yaakov, the reason is that at that moment G’d withheld from him the visions of the redemption and what precedes it which he had intended to reveal to his sons. In other words, at that moment he had become primarily physical, his spiritual dimension having temporarily become subordinate. There is another instance where we could question why the Torah suddenly reverts to the use of the name Yaakov. This is in 48,3 where he explains to Joseph where and when he had his first communication from G’d, i.e. at Luz. The reason that the Torah calls him Yaakov at that point in our chapter is because he referred to a time in his life prior to his having the name Yisrael added to his regular name. in other words, we detect the following pattern. When the Torah indicates that Yaakov had not yet established mutual communication with G’d he is called Yaakov. When, even after he had established such communication, this channel of communication had been interrupted, he is also called Yaakov instead of Yisrael. A Midrashic approach based on Tanchuma Vayechi 1: the words “the days of Yisrael’s death were approaching” reflect what we have read in Chronicles I 29,15: “for we are sojourners with You, mere transients like our fathers; our days on earth are like a shadow, with nothing in prospect.” If at least the shadow would be that of a wall or a tree, i.e. an enduring shadow; but our days are only like the passing shadow of a bird which flies over us. This is what the psalmist had in mind when he wrote concerning man (Psalms 144,4): “Man is like a breath; his days like that of a passing shadow.” As soon as the bird flies over, his shadow departs with it. When David said in Chronicles that “there is no prospect,” he meant that there is no prospect of escaping physical death. Everybody knew and verbalised the fact that he would die. Avraham phrased it by saying (Genesis 15,2) “I am going to die without a child.” [Had he not known that he would die, having no child to replace him would not have bothered him. Ed.] Yitzchak had called in his son Esau in order to bless him “before I die” (Genesis 27,4). Yaakov referred to his impending death by saying “I want to be buried with my fathers” (Genesis 47,30). Seeing that he said these words close to his death, it is clear he spoke about the need to die, i.e. “when the days of Yisrael to die drew near.” When Yaakov was close to death he began to belittle himself in the presence of Joseph by saying: “if I please find favour in your eyes.” You find a similar phenomenon happening with David where the prophet describes the last days of his life as “the days for David to die drew near,” whereas nowhere else did the prophet refer to him as merely David instead of as “King David.” All of this proves that on or about the time of a man’s death he loses whatever control he used to possess over his spirit as mentioned in Kohelet 8,8: “No man has authority over the lifebreath- to hold back the lifebreath;” there is no authority over the day of death.”

ויקרא לבנו ליוסף, “he called in his son Joseph.” He did not call upon his firstborn son Reuven or upon Yehudah who represented Royalty but upon Joseph who had the authority to carry out his request. אל נא תקברני במצרים, “do not bury me in Egypt.” Actually, Yaakov requested two things from Joseph. 1) not to be buried in Egypt. 2) to be buried in the land of Israel. He did not want to be buried in Egypt in order that the Egyptians should not deify him after his death. He was afraid that just as the people worshiping idols are punished so are the objects of their worship. We know this from Exodus 12,12 “and G’d punished all the idols of the Egyptians.” He asked to be buried in the land of Israel just as all the patriarchs expressed a desire to be buried in the Holy Land. This is because the nature of the land helps those buried there to obtain atonement for their sins. Isaiah speaks of this when he said: “It shall be inhabited by folk whose sin has been forgiven.” We also have a verse in Deut. 32,43 stating the same. The Torah writes of the Holy Land: “its land will atone for its people.” Eretz Yisrael is the gateway to heaven, the place whence all the prayers of the Jewish people ascend to heaven. This is the reason all the sages wished themselves to die in that land when their time to die came. There is a tradition that certain highly spiritual people enter heaven from there without the need for their souls to take painful spiritual detours. We also have a tradition that the people who died in the land of Israel will be amongst the first to be revived at the time of the resurrection. People buried in other lands will experience pain at the time of the resurrection as they will have to travel underground after bursting out of their graves until they arrive in the land of Israel (based on an interpretation of Ezekiel 36,14).

ויקרבו, Yaakov felt himself that he was approaching death, as his physical weakness kept increasing, and he began to be afraid that his death would occur without adequate warning signs, suddenly. This is why he commanded Joseph that when the time came he should carry him to his final resting place in the land of Canaan where he wished to lie next to his fathers.

שים נא ידך תחת ירכי, we explained the meaning of this phrase in Parshat Chayey Sarah (24,2).

חסד ואמת, the word אמת, a truth, i.e. a requirement he can insist on, referred to Joseph’s duty to bring his father to burial. The word חסד, an act of love, not required by law, was that he should take the trouble to transport his remains from Egypt and have them buried in the land of Canaan.

AND WHEN THE DAYS OF ISRAEL DREW NEAR TO DIE. This means when the time for Israel’s death approached, which was during the last year of his life, (Ramban’s intent is to say that the verse does not refer to Jacob’s day of death but to the general period in his life when he felt his powers beginning to ebb.) he called his son Joseph. The purport of it is that he felt exhaustion and undue weakness in himself, but he was not sick. Rather, he knew that he would not live much longer, and therefore he called his son Joseph. Now after Joseph returned to Egypt [from visiting with his father who lived in Goshen, Jacob] became ill, whereupon Joseph was informed, and he came before him with his two sons so that he [Jacob] would bless them. In a similar sense is the verse, Now the days of David drew near that he should die, (I Kings 2:1. There too the sense of the verse is that this occurred some time before David’s death.) and there it says, I go the way of all the earth, (Ibid., Verse 2.) [which clearly indicates that the meaning of the first verse is] that David knew in his heart that his end was approaching.

ויקרבו ימי ישראל למות, whenever a person is reported as about to make his last will and testament to his children, the introductory phrase is that he felt death approaching, i.e. ויקרבו. When Yitzchok was about to bestow the blessing on Esau, the Torah also prefaced this by describing that he felt himself close to death (27,1-20) [even if the word for approaching used there was not the same as here, i.e. ויקרבו. Ed.] He did say: “I do not know the day of my death.” In Kings I 2,1 when David gives his final instructions to his son Solomon, we also read the preface ויקרבו ימי דוד למות ויצו, “when David felt death approaching, he commanded, etc.” Actually, our paragraph commences with the words וישב ישראל בארץ מצרים, “Israel settled down in the land of Egypt,” (verse 27 in our chapter.) The words ויחי יעקב בארץ מצרים in our verse must be understood as a direct continuation of verse 27. The Jewish communities were not willing to conclude the reading of the weekly portion with the words ותהי הארץ לפרעה, “the land belonged permanently to Pharaoh.” This is why they added verse 27 as the final verse of Parshat Vayigash.

שים נא ידך, we already explained this expression on 24,2 when Avraham requested an oath from his servant Eliezer using the same words.

ויקרבו ימי ישראל למות AND WHEN THE DAYS OF ISRAEL S DEATH APPROACHED — Everyone of whom it is stated that his days drew near to die did not attain to the age of his fathers (Genesis Rabbah 76:3). Some editions add: Isaac lived 180 years, whereas Jacob lived only 147. Similarly it is said in the case of David, “his days drew near” and he lived 70 years, whereas his father reached the age of eighty.

ויקרא לבנו ליוסף AND HE CALLED HIS SON JOSEPH — he called that one who had the power in his hands to do what he was about to ask (Genesis Rabbah 96:3).

שים נא ידך PUT, I PRAY THEE, THY HAND — and take an oath.

חסד ואמת MERCY AND TRUTH — The mercy shown to the dead is “mercy of truth” (true, disinterested kindness) since one cannot hope for any reward (Genesis Rabbah 96:5).

אל נא תקברני במצרים BURY ME NOT, I PRAY THEE, IN EGYPT — Because its soil will ultimately become lice which would swarm beneath my body. Further, those who die outside the Land of Israel will not live again at the Resurrection except after the pain caused by the body rolling through underground-passages until it reaches the Holy Land) And another reason is that the Egyptians should not make me (my corpse or my tomb) the object of idolatrous worship (Genesis Rabbah 76:3).

אם נא מצאתי חן בעיניך. So spricht nicht ein Vater zu seinem Sohne, ja nicht einmal ein Sohn zu seinem Vater, am allerwenigsten hatte wohl Jakob also zu Josef zu sprechen. Das Wörtchen נא dürfte das Auffallende lösen. Josef hat gewiss mit aller Hingebung durch seine so hohe Stellung dem Vater Vorrechte zufließen lassen wollen, die Jakob jedoch nie annehmen wollte. Jakob wollte nicht Vater des Ministers sein. Hier war endlich eine Gelegenheit, in welcher Jakob Josefs Machteinfluss benutzen wollte, daher: wenn ich denn doch Gunst usw.; willst du mir denn eine besondere Güte erweisen, so erfülle mir diese Bitte. — שים נא ידך תחת ירכי. (Siehe oben Kapitel 24, 2). ירך, verwandt mit ירק von sich werfen, wovon: Speichel. יֶרֶך: der hintere oder der untere Teil, der, wenn der Mensch sich niedersetzt oder niederlegt, zuerst mit dem Boden in Berührung kommt. Das Gegenteil von שכם in השכם. "Lege die Hand unter mich im Grabe" — versprich mir die Verwendung deiner Macht also, daß ich darauf sicher mich zum Sterben niederlegen könne. Auffallend ist, wie schon bemerkt, die Form עמדי für עמי, die mit keinem anderen Suffixum vorkommt. Vielleicht liegt darin die Nuance, daß das Erbetene nicht bloß die Beziehung zwischen dem Bittenden und dem Angesprochenen, sondern den ganzen Standpunkt des Bittenden berührt. Unerklärt bliebe aber immer noch, warum man nicht auch sagen kann: ועשיתי עמרך, und wenn dies zwischen Menschen und Menschen auch vielleicht zu anmaßend wäre, warum es auch von Gott zum Menschen nicht vorkommt. —

חסד, verwandt mit אשד: sich ergießen, daher sich ganz hingeben חַסֵד andern ganz hingeben: der Entwürdigung preisgeben). Charakteristisch ist die Wahrung des Begriffs des wahren הסד durch die Beifügung ואמת. So: alle Wege Gottes sind חסד ואמת. Der Mensch übt oft aus lauter Liebe חסד ואמת .רעות ist eine Liebe, die über die Hingebung nicht das Wesentliche vergisst. Abraham hat den sehnlichsten Wunsch, seinen Sohn zu verheiraten. Wenn er nun so von diesem Wunsche beherrscht wäre, daß, fände er keine geistig und sittlich dem זרע אברהם entsprechende Frau, er auch die Wahl einer andern gestattete, so wäre dies kein אמת .חסד של אמת ist immer eine dem חסד beigefügte Klausel.

Jakob weiß ganz gewiss, daß Josef seinen Vater mit allem möglichen Glanz bestatten werde. Er spricht aber: vergiss über die דoח das אמת nicht. Ich will lieber gar nicht, als in Mizrajim begraben werden. Der Hauptnachdruck liegt auf der Bitte: nicht in Mizrajim begraben zu werden. Wir hätten denken können, die Erfüllung dieser Bitte sei gar nicht so schwer gewesen, daß es dazu einer feierlichen Beschwörung bedurft hätte. Allein da, wie sich aus allem ergibt, Pharao und Ägypten es durchaus nicht gerne gesehen hätten, wenn Jakob und seine Familie wieder fortgezogen wären, so musste schon das Hinaufbringen der Leiche nach Kanaan keinen guten Eindruck machen, vielmehr offenkundig zeigen, Josefs Familie betrachte sich noch nicht als eingebürgert und hänge mit ihrem Herzen noch an der alten Heimat.

Allein das Motiv dürfte noch tiefer zu suchen sein. Jakob hatte noch siebenzehn Jahre mit seinem Hause in Mizrajim gelebt, mochte gewahrt haben, welchen mächtigen Einfluß das הֵאחז בה auf seine Nachkommen zu üben begonnen, wie sie schon anfingen, im Nil den Jordan zu begrüßen, und in dem Aufenthalt in Mizrajim gar kein Galut zu erblicken. Motiv genug, um mit so feierlichem Ernst darauf zu dringen, daß sie ihn nicht in Mizrajim begraben, daß sie ihn in das Land ihrer alten, wirklichen Heimat tragen sollten; Motiv genug, ihnen zu sagen: ihr hoffet und wünschet in Mizrajim zu leben, ich möchte nicht einmal in Mizrajim begraben sein. Darum sprach er diesen Wunsch auch nicht als Jakob, von individuell persönlichem Standpunkte, sondern als "Israel" aus, als Träger der nationalen Bestimmung, als Mahnung an die nationale Zukunft seiner Kinder.

אל נא תקברני במצרים, even temporarily, in a coffin, as was done with Joseph (50,26). Yaakov reasoned that if he allowed himself to be interred even temporarily, Joseph would never be allowed to take his remains to the land of Canaan at a later date. They would argue that the honour done to him and burial in the soil of Egypt was adequate as it had been for the most outstanding kings. [we must understand the preoccupation the Egyptians had with the cult of death and what they presumed to be their afterlife. The whole culture of that people revolved around burial, hence the pyramids. Ed.]

Everyone of whom it is said that his “days drew near”... Rashi is answering the questions: Why does it say “days” in the plural form, [rather than saying, “The day of Yisrael’s death drew near”]? And why does it speak of the days, implying that the days drew near? It should say, “Yisrael drew near to die.” Thus Rashi explains that the days themselves indeed “drew near.” They shortened and drew near [rather than expanding to the age of his fathers].

And take an oath. Rashi is explaining that we should not think the placing of the hand is the oath itself. He knows this because it is written regarding Avraham (24:2): “Place your hand under my thigh,” after which it says, “I will have you swear by Adonoy.” Since Avraham did it this way, [to place the hand under the thigh while swearing,] so did Yaakov. (Re’m)

Is considered true kindness for one does not anticipate... Rashi does not mean that it is true kindness only when it is done with the dead. Rather, whenever kindness is done without the anticipation of remuneration, even if the recipient of the kindness is alive, it is considered “kind and truthful.” For Eliezer said that Lavan and Besuel should [“do kindly and truthfully” (49:22) and] give him Rivkah freely, anticipating no remuneration — not from him, as he promised them no gifts of silver and gold, and certainly not from Avraham, since he was far away. You might ask: Why did Rashi not explain before, regarding Eliezer, that this is considered true kindness? The answer is: Yaakov in fact remunerated Yoseif for swearing to take him to Eretz Yisrael. He said (48:22), “I have given you one share more,” as Rashi explains ad loc. That is why Rashi explains the point here [and not regarding Eliezer]. It is to say that even so, at the time Yaakov asked Yoseif to bury him in Eretz Yisrael, he neither promised to give him anything, nor did he have in mind to give him one share more. And that is why it says here, “kindly and truthfully.”

By suffering the pain of rolling through underground tunnels. Also, so that the Egyptians not make a deity of me... Rashi needed these three explanations because: If it was only on account of lice, Yaakov should have requested that they make an iron coffin. Therefore Rashi explained, “rolling through underground tunnels.” And if because of these two reasons alone, why did Yaakov trouble Yoseif that he be brought to Eretz Yisrael immediately? He could have told them to take his bones along when they leave Egypt, as Yoseif said [to do for himself] in 50:25. Thus Rashi gives the [third] reason, “That the Egyptians not make a deity of me.” And there is a question: If the only reason is that the Egyptians might “make a deity of me,” why did he say to take him to Eretz Yisrael, rather than to cast him in the Nile? Thus Rashi also offers the reason of “rolling through underground tunnels.” And if it was for these two reasons alone, he should have had them swear just as Yoseif told his brothers to swear, [that they will take him along when they leave Egypt]. Thus Rashi also offers the reason of “its soil will become lice.” (Maharshal)

The time for Israel to die approached, as he sensed that he would soon pass away. And he called his son, Joseph, both because he was his favorite son, and because he was the ruler of Egypt, and he said to him: Please, if I have found favor in your eyes, please place your hand under my thigh and swear to me (see 24:2) that you will perform kindness and truth with me; please do not bury me in Egypt. Jacob felt the need to administer an oath to Joseph, since this was not a simple request, as will be seen below.

ויקרבו ימי ישראל למות, “As Israel’s time to die approached, etc.” These words do not refer to the sickness from which Yaakov died eventually, but they refer to a period when Yaakov began to experience the weakness which is common to people whose strength begins to ebb prior to their death. At a later stage, when Yaakov actually took sick and Joseph was told about it, he rushed to see his father and obtain his last blessing as well as to obtain blessings for his sons.

ויאמר..שים נא ידך תחת ירכי, “he said: ‘please place your hand beneath my loins.’” Here the Torah does not continue with reporting that Joseph did as requested, as it had done when Avraham made a similar request to Eliezer when he sent him to look for a wife for Yitzchok. Here the Torah did not want to spell out this detail, preserving the element of delicacy of this procedure. Some commentators, claiming to interpret the plain meaning of the text, say that the request to place his hand under Yaakov’s loins did not refer to an oath, seeing that Yaakov requested the oath at a later stage (verse 31). They say that Yaakov requested Joseph to take over the position known in Talmudic parlance as עובי הקורה, “center post,” i.e. the position of head of the clan with all the attendant responsibilities.

ועשית עמדי חסד ואמת, “and perform for me a true deed of loving kindness.” Rashi explains that the term “true loving kindness” is always used when the party performing the deed in question entertains no expectation of being rewarded for it in this life. The question raised against this interpretation is that we see that Yaakov immediately recompensed Joseph by giving him the city of Shechem over and above the normal portion allocated to the tribes of Ephrayim and Menashe. The answer given is that we are to read the line as: “you will do with me something which would be a true act of kindness when performed for other מתים, dead people who cannot reciprocate in kind.” However, in my opinion the question is not even in place, as nothing was further from Joseph’s mind than expecting a reward. Yaakov’s giving Shechem to Joseph was entirely free-willed, not in the nature of a reward at all.

“When the time approached for Israel to die” [47:29]. Jacob felt in his body and saw that his strength was weakening, and that he would soon die. He sent for Joseph and wanted to ask him and make him swear that he would take him after his death to the land of Canaan to be buried there. Bahya writes. Why does the verse say, “Jacob lived” [47:28]. Here he is called Jacob and soon after he is called Israel. Why was he not called by his name? The explanation is that the name Jacob points to physical deeds. That is, when Jacob went to eat and drink and feed his body. Here he is called Jacob. When he went to do good deeds for his soul, he was called Israel. That is, the name Israel came to him because of dominion, that he vanquished the angel. Therefore, when Jacob went to fulfill commandments, good deeds and Torah, the verse calls him Israel. Therefore, the portion said, “Jacob lived.” That is, when he went to eat and drink to sustain his body, he was called Jacob. Afterwards, when he was sick and about to die, that his body would go away from the world and his soul would begin to live properly in the next world, which is the proper life for the soul. This is called Israel in the verse. (Bahya, Genesis, 47:29.)

“He summoned his son Joseph” [47:29]. Jacob called his son Joseph, even though Reuben was the firstborn and Judah was a king. Yet, he called Joseph who was a king in Egypt, who had the power to take Jacob to the land of Canaan. (Bahya, Genesis, 47:29.)

“True kindness” [47:29]. Jacob said: you should do a true kindness with me. That is to say, even though I ask you that you should carry me to bury me in the land of Canaan, I will not be able to repay you when I will be dead. Therefore, he said: you should do a true kindness. That is to say, it is called true when one does not hope to receive a reward for what he did. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 47:29.)

“Please do not bury me in Egypt” [47:29]. You should not bury me in Egypt for three reasons. The first is because the earth of Egypt will produce lice because of Israel in the days of Moses Our Teacher. The second is, when the Messiah will come, the dead will come back to life and the dead outside the land of Israel will have to roll through mountains and caves to the land of Israel and this will be painful. The third is that the Egyptians will make an idol out me, if I will lie in Egypt. (Rashi, Genesis, 47:29.)

Our last example is, at the same time, a good illustration for the meaning of the concept of “hesed and emeth.” Hesed is love or lovingkindness; emeth is sureness, steadfastness, reliability, enduring strength, lasting faithfulness. Hesed ve’emeth would then be lovingkindness that is sure, that is reliable, that endures and may be even irrevocable. When Jacob made Joseph swear that he would not bury him in Egypt, he asked his son to do with him hesed and emeth. (Gen. 47:29.) Jacob could be fairly sure of the love of Joseph. However, his request involved a vital question of policy. How would returning the old father’s body for burial in the old homeland affect the position and political condition of the entire family in Egypt? Would it not be interpreted by the Egyptians as a proof that the children of Israel were strangers and were themselves looking for the time when they would leave the country? Considerations of political expediency might induce Joseph to feel justified in breaking the promise made to his father. It is, perhaps, for this reason that Jacob asked for an act of love and enduring faithfulness, for hesed ve’emeth, for lovingkindness in the form of an irrevocable commitment. The hesed ve’emeth that the spies promised to Rahab (Josh. 2:14.) was such a promise of unqualified commitment. It was to be an act of hesed that was sure and could not be changed under any conditions.

And when the days depart from this world, they all approach the Supernal King, as it is written, "And the days drew close for David to die" (I Kings 2:1), "and the days drew close for Jacob to die" (Beresheet 47:29).

“The time for Israel to die approached and he called his son, Joseph, and he said to him: Please, if I have found favor in your eyes, please place your hand under my thigh and perform kindness and truth with me; please do not bury me in Egypt” (Genesis 47:29). “The time for Israel to die approached.” It is written: “For I am a stranger with You, a resident, [as were all my fathers]” (Psalms 39:13). “For we are strangers before You…our days on earth are like a shadow, and there is no hope” (I Chronicles 29:15) – if only it would be like the shadow of a wall, or the shadow of a tree, (If our life is compared to a shadow, if only it could be like the shadow of a wall or tree, which stays in place and has stability.) but instead it is like the shadow of a bird when it is flying, as it is written: “Like a passing shadow” (Psalms 144:4). “And there is no hope” – there is no one who can hope not to die. Everyone knows and says with his mouth that he will die. Abraham said: “I am going (“Going” here is in the sense of dying.) childless” (Genesis 15:2). Isaac said: “I will bless you before the Lord before my death” (Genesis 27:7). Jacob, too, said: “I will lie with my fathers” (Genesis 47:30). When [did he say this]? When he was about to die.

“The time for Israel…approached.” It is written: “There is no person who rules the spirit to retain the spirit, and there is no dominion on the day of death” (Ecclesiastes 8:8). Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin in the name of Rabbi Levi: The trumpets that Moses crafted in the wilderness, when he was tending toward death, the Holy One blessed be He sequestered them so that another would not sound it, and they would come to him, as it is written: “Assemble to me all the elders of your tribes” (Deuteronomy 31:28). (Moses asked that the elders be assembled; he did not merely have someone blow the trumpets, as he would have done in the past, because they had been sequestered. ) This was to realize what is written: “There is no dominion on the day of death.” Another matter, “there is no dominion on the day of death” – when Zimri performed that action, (He brought a Midyanite woman into his tent. ) what is written there? “He went after the man of Israel into the tent” (Numbers 25:8). (This is stated about Pinḥas. ) Where was Moses? And would Pinḥas speak before Moses? Rather, it is to realize: “There is no dominion on the day of death.” Death is nothing other than an expression of lowering. Salvation was given to Pinḥas, and Moses was lowered. (Moses’s death was drawing near, and so others began to assert authority. ) Of David, too, it is written: “King David was old” (I Kings 1:1). When he was about to die, what is written in his regard? “The time for King David [to die] approached” is not written here, but, rather, “the time for David [to die] approached” (I Kings 2:1). Jacob, too, when he was about to die, he began lowering himself before Joseph, and he said to him: “Please, if I have found favor in your eyes.” When? It was when he approached death, as it is stated: “The time for Israel to die approached.”

Reish Lakish said: [God said:] ‘As you live, you will lie down, but you will not die,’ as it is stated: “The time for Israel to die approached.” (Although Jacob’s body would cease to function, he would not die. The verse cited can be more literally translated: “The days of Israel drew near to death,” implying that Jacob’s days would die, meaning he would no longer function in the physical world, but he himself would not die (Maharzu). ) What is “approached [vayikrevu]”? The Holy One blessed be He said: ‘The day complains against you, saying that it would stand still.’ (Since Jacob was supposed to die on that day, the day would not be able to end without him dying. ) It is like a person who says: ‘So-and-so has attacked [karav] another.’ That is “vayikrevu.” (The midrash portrays the day, as it were, submitting a claim against Jacob, that he must die on that day. ) Everyone in whose regard it is written that the time for him [to die] approached, did not reach the days of his ancestors. “Approach” is written with regard to David – “the time for David to die approached” (I Kings 2:1). He did not reach the days of his ancestors. Of Boaz, Oved, and Yishai, the Sages said that they lived more than four hundred years, but David lived only seventy years. He did not reach the days of his ancestors; therefore “approach” is written in his regard. Amram lived one hundred and thirty-seven years, but Moses lived only one hundred and twenty years; therefore, “approach” is written in his regard: “Behold, your days are approaching to die” (Deuteronomy 31:14). And Jacob, approach is written in his regard, as he did not reach the days of his ancestors. Abraham lived one hundred and seventy-five years, Isaac, one hundred and eighty, and Jacob, one hundred and forty-seven. That is why “approach” is written in his regard – “the time for Israel to die approached.”

“He called his son, Joseph” – why did he not call Reuben or Judah? Reuben was the firstborn and Judah was the king, but he disregarded them and called Joseph. Why did he do so? Because [Joseph] had the capability to carry out [his request]. That is why “he called his son, Joseph” – because the hour was given to him. (He was in power at the time. ) “Please do not bury me in Egypt” – it is for your sake I descended to Egypt; it is for your sake that I said: “Now I can die” (Genesis 46:30). “Perform kindness and truth with me” – is there kindness of falsehood, that he says “kindness and truth”? Why [did he say] so? The folk saying says: If the son of your friend dies, bear with him. (This is because he can repay the kindness.) If your friend dies, cast off. (Cast off sorrow, because he cannot repay the kindness.) He said to him: ‘If you perform kindness for me after my death, it is a true kindness.’ “Please do not bury me in Egypt” – why? Because the ultimate fate of the land of Egypt is to be stricken with lice, and they will swarm in my body. That is why “please do not bury me in Egypt.” Another matter, for what reason did Jacob request not to be buried in Egypt? It was so they would not make him the subject of idolatrous worship, for just as punishment is exacted from one who worships, so is punishment exacted from the one who is worshipped, as it is written: “Against all the gods of Egypt I will administer punishments: I am the Lord” (Exodus 12:12). Likewise you find regarding Daniel, once he interpreted Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, what is written? “Then King Nebuchadnezzar fell on his face, and he prostrated himself to Daniel, and said to pour out to him a meal offering and fragrances” (Daniel 2:46). But Daniel did not accept it. Why? Because just as punishment is exacted from those who worship idols, so is punishment exacted from it. (From the subject of such worship. ) Likewise you find regarding Ḥiram. Once he made himself into a god, what was his ultimate fate? It is written in his regard: “Because your heart became haughty, and you said: I am a god” (Ezekiel 28:2) – the Holy One blessed be He said to him: “Behold, you are wiser than Daniel” (Ezekiel 28:3). Nebuchadnezzar sought to sacrifice to him, but he did not want it, and you make yourself a god? What was his ultimate fate? “I cast you upon the ground, I placed you before kings that they may gaze upon you” (Ezekiel 28:17). Another matter, Jacob said: ‘So that the Egyptians will not merit redemption because of me. They prostrate themselves to a lamb, and I was likened to a lamb, as it is stated: “Israel is a scattered lamb” (Jeremiah 50:17), and regarding Egypt it is written: “Whose flesh is the flesh of donkeys” (Ezekiel 23:20), and it is written: “The firstborn of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb”’ (Exodus 34:20). That is, “please do not bury me in Egypt.” Why did all the patriarchs demand and have fondness for burial in the Land of Israel? Rabbi Elazar said: These are cryptic matters. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: What are these “cryptic matters”? “I walk before the Lord in the land of the living” (Psalms 116:9). (The Land of Israel is the “land of the living.”) Our Rabbis said two matters in the name of Rabbi Ḥelbo: Why did the patriarchs have fondness for burial in the Land of Israel? Because the dead of the Land of Israel come to life first in the messianic era, and enjoy the messianic years. Rabbi Ḥanina said: One who dies outside of the Land of Israel and is buried there, has undergone two deaths, (Death and burial.) as so it is written: “And you, Pashḥur, and all the dwellers in your house, will go into captivity, and to Babylon you will come, and there you will die, and there you will be buried” (Jeremiah 20:6). That is, he has undergone two deaths. That is why Jacob says to Joseph: “Please do not bury me in Egypt.” Rabbi Simon said: If so, the righteous who are buried outside of the Land of Israel suffer a loss. What, then, does the Holy One blessed be He do? He makes tunnels in the ground for them and makes them like channels, and they roll along until they reach the Land of Israel. The Holy One blessed be He then places in them a spirit of life and they arise. From where is this derived? It is written: “Behold, I am opening your graves, and I will take you up from your graves, My people, and I will bring you to the soil of Israel” (Ezekiel 37:12), and then: “I will place My spirit into you and you will live” (Ezekiel 37:14). Reish Lakish said: It is an explicit verse, that once they reach the Land of Israel, the Holy One blessed be He will place a soul in them, as it is stated: “Who places a soul in the people upon it” (Isaiah 42:5). There was an incident involving Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] and Rabbi Eliezer, who were walking near the gates outside Tiberias. They saw the coffin of a dead person who came from outside of the Land of Israel to be buried in the Land of Israel. Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] said to Rabbi Eliezer: ‘What has this one, whose soul departed outside of the Land of Israel and came to be buried in the Land of Israel, accomplished? I read in his regard: “My inheritance you rendered an abomination” (Jeremiah 2:7) during your lifetime, “and you came, and you defiled My land” (Jeremiah 2:7) after your death.’ [Rabbi Eliezer] said to him: ‘Once he is buried in the Land of Israel, the Holy One blessed be He grants him atonement, as it is written: “His earth will atone for his people”’ (Deuteronomy 32:43). Rabbi Yoḥanan, when he was departing from the world, said to those who needed to tend to him: ‘Bury me in garments dyed green, not white and not black, so if I stand among the righteous we will not be shamed, and if I stand among the wicked we will not be disgraced.’ (Rabbi Yoḥanan was not sure if he would be summoned with the righteous, who appear in white, or the wicked, who appear in black. He therefore asked to be buried in a different color so as to avoid a situation in which he was dressed in white but summoned with the wicked, which would be embarrassing, or a situation in which he was dressed in black but summoned with the righteous, which might appear as a distortion of Divine justice.) Rabbi Yoshiya, when he was departing from the world, said to those who were standing over him: ‘Summon my disciples.’ He said to them: ‘Bury me in white garments. Why? Because I am not ashamed to greet my Creator because of my actions.’ Rabbenu, (Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.) when he was departing from the world, commanded three matters: ‘Do not move my widow from my house. Do not eulogize me in the towns in the Land of Israel. And do not allow a gentile to touch my bier; rather, let he who tended to me during my lifetime tend to me after my death.’ During his lifetime, he resided in Tzippori seventeen years, and he would read in his regard: “Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years,” and Yehuda lived in Tzippori seventeen years. Rabbenu suffered from pain in his teeth for thirteen years, and all those thirteen years, no woman died in childbirth in the Land of Israel and no woman miscarried in the Land of Israel. After thirteen years, Rabbenu became angry at Rabbi Ḥiyya HaGadol. Elijah, of blessed memory, came to Rabbenu in the guise of Rabbi Ḥiyya, placed his hand on his tooth, and he was immediately healed. On the next day, Rabbi Ḥiyya came to him. He said to him: ‘Rabbi, that tooth of yours, what is its condition?’ He said: ‘From the moment you came to me yesterday, it was healed.’ At that moment, Rabbi Ḥiyya said: ‘Woe unto you, birthing mothers in the Land of Israel. Woe unto you, pregnant women in the Land of Israel.’ Nevertheless, he said to him: ‘It was not I who placed a hand on your tooth.’ Rabbenu knew that it had been Elijah of blessed memory. From that moment, Rabbi began treating Rabbi Ḥiyya with honor.

Another matter, Moses said to Him: ‘Master of the universe, after all the glory and all the bravery that my eyes saw, will I die?’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘Moses, “Who is the man who lives and does not see death…?”’ (Psalms 89:49). What is “who is the man who lives”? Rabbi Tanḥuma said: Who is a man like Abraham, who descended into the fiery furnace and was saved? But then, “Abraham expired and died” (Genesis 25:8). Who is a man like Isaac, who outstretched his neck on the altar? But then he said: “Behold, I have now grown old; I do not know the day of my death” (Genesis 27:2). Who is a man like Jacob, who encountered the angel? But then, “the time of Israel approached to die” (Genesis 47:29). Who is a man like Moses, who spoke to his Creator face to face? But then, “behold, your days are approaching to die.”

“I again saw under the sun that the race is not to the swift, and the war is not to the valiant; also bread is not to the wise, and also wealth is not to the clever, and also favor is not to the knowledgeable, but rather, time and chance befalls them all” (Ecclesiastes 9:11). “That the race is not to the swift” – this is Jacob our patriarch; yesterday: “Jacob lifted his feet [and went to the land of the children of the east]” (Genesis 29:1), and today it is written: “He gathered his feet onto the bed [and expired]” (Genesis 49:33). “And the war is not to the valiant” – this is Jacob; yesterday, “he rolled the stone off the mouth of the well” (Genesis 29:10), and Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Like a person removing the stopper from the mouth of a flask, (This demonstrates Jacob’s great strength, as the stone was heavy enough that generally multiple people had to lift it together (see Genesis 29:8).) and today, “the sons of Israel transported Jacob their father” (Genesis 46:5), his body, and he could not be carried even [sitting] in a litter. (Jacob was so weak that his sons had to carry him themselves as they traveled.) “Also bread is not to the wise” – this is Jacob; yesterday, “Jacob sacrificed an offering on the mountain…[and called his brethren to eat bread] and they ate bread” (Genesis 31:54). Were they his brethren? He had one brother, and if only he had buried him. (His only brother, Esau, wanted to kill him; it would have been better for Jacob had Esau died.) Were they not his sons? Rather, once they reached his shoulders he likened them to himself and called them brethren. Today, “Return and purchase a little food for us…” (Genesis 43:2). (Jacob asked his sons to return to Egypt to purchase food. Instead of him providing for them, he asked them to provide food for him.) “And also wealth is not to the clever” – this is Jacob; “the man became exceedingly prosperous [vayifrotz]” (Genesis 30:43). Rabbi Simon teaches in the name of Rabbi Shimon that he had a microcosm of the World to Come, as it is stated: “The one who breaks through [haporetz] will have ascended before them” (Micah 2:13). (Just as the Messiah, the subject of that verse, will break the laws of nature, God broke the laws of nature in causing Jacob’s flocks to multiply in order to grant him wealth.) But today, “Joseph sustained his father and his brothers…” (Genesis 47:12). “And also favor is not to the knowledgeable” – this is Jacob. Yesterday, “I know my son, I know” (Genesis 48:19). I know about the incident of Judah and Tamar, the incident of Reuben and Bilha. If the matters that were not revealed to you, were revealed to me, the matters that were revealed to you, all the more so. But today, he said to him: “If I have found favor in your eyes…do not bury me in Egypt (Genesis 47:29). (Jacob was more knowledgeable than Joseph, as indicated in Genesis 48:19, yet he had to ask for Joseph’s favor so that he could be buried in the land of Israel.) Another matter, “the race is not to the swift” – this is Asael, as it is stated: “Asael was light on his feet, like one of the antelopes…” (II Samuel 2:18). How was his lightness manifest? He would run over the awns of the stalks and they would not break. Yesterday, “Asael was light on his feet,” and today, “Avner struck him with the back of the spear” (II Samuel 2:23). “And the war is not to the valiant” – this is Avner, as it is written: “Are you not a man? Who is your equal in Israel…” (I Samuel 26:15). As Rabbi Asi said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: It is easier for a person to move a six-cubit-wide wall than one of Avner’s legs; but today, “shall Avner die the death of a scoundrel?” (II Samuel 3:33). (David said this after Yoav tricked Avner and killed him.) “Also bread is not to the wise” – this is Solomon. Yesterday, “Solomon’s daily provision was thirty kor of fine flour and sixty kor of flour” (I Kings 5:2), and it is written: “Ten fattened bulls…” (I Kings 5:3). Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Likewise, each and every day, and likewise each and every one of his wives would prepare a meal for him, under the impression that he would dine with her. But today, “this was my portion from all my toil” (Ecclesiastes 2:10). There is one who says: [All he had was] his bowl, there is one who says: [All he had was] his walking stick, and there is one who says: [All he had was] his belt. (This is an allusion to the midrash (Kohelet Rabba 2:10) that Solomon was displaced from his throne and made to wander as a commoner with almost nothing.) “And also wealth is not to the clever” – this is Job. Yesterday, “his livestock was seven thousand sheep…” (Job 1:3), “and his livestock spread [paratz] in the land” (Job 1:10). Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Ḥanina said: He breached [paratz] the boundaries of the world. Everywhere, the way of the world is that wolves kill the goats; however, with Job, the goats would kill the wolves. But today, “pity me, pity me, you are my friends…” (Job 19:21). “And also favor is not to the knowledgeable” – this is Joshua. Rabbi Aḥva son of Rabbi Zeira said: There are two matters that Joshua spoke before Moses, but they did not find favor in his eyes, and these are: One regarding the appointment of the elders, and one in the incident of the [Golden] Calf. In the appointment of the elders, as it is written: “My lord Moses, incarcerate them [kela’em]” (Numbers 11:28); he said to him: Put an end to them [kalem] and remove them from the world. “Moses said to him: Are you zealous on my behalf?” (Numbers 11:29). [Moses] said to him: ‘Joshua, am I jealous of you? (According to rabbinic tradition, Joshua’s statement to Moses about two elders, Eldad and Medad, was made after the latter prophesied that Moses would die and Joshua would lead the nation in the land of Israel (Sanhedrin 17a). That is the backdrop of this midrash, in which Joshua demanded that these elders be punished for their lack of respect toward Moses, and Moses responded that he was not insulted by their prophecy (Rabbi David Luria).) If only my son could be like you, if only all Israel could be like you, “would that all the people of the Lord would be prophets” (Numbers 11:29).’ And one regarding the [Golden] Calf, as it is stated: “Joshua heard the sound of the people in their uproar [and he said to Moses: There is a sound of war in the camp]” (Exodus 32:17). Moses said to him: ‘A person who is destined to assert authority over six hundred thousand [men] does not know to distinguish between one sound and another sound? “It is not the sound of a cry of strength [gevura]” (Exodus 32:18),’ as it is stated: “Israel prevailed [vegavar]” (Exodus 17:11); ‘“and it is not the sound of a cry of weakness” (Exodus 32:18),’ as it is stated: “Joshua weakened [Amalek]” (Exodus 17:13); ‘“the sound of a cry, I hear” (Exodus 32:18).’ Rabbi Asi said: It is the sound of praise of idol worship, I hear. Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Asi: You do not have any generation that did not take one ounce of the calf. (The punishment for this sin is distributed over all the generations.)

He said to him (in Gen. 24:2): PLEASE PUT YOUR HAND < UNDER MY THIGH >. See how they loved circumcision! And Jacob also, when he had Joseph swear, said to him (in Gen. 47:29): [PLEASE] PUT [YOUR HAND UNDER MY THIGH]. For what reason did they love circumcision? Because they knew that it was going to save their children from Gehinnom in the world to come. (See Gen. R. 48:8; Exod. R. 19:4; Tanh., 5:6; cf. M. Ps. 1:20; 6:1; cf. also Gen. R. 21:9.) Thus it is stated (in Is. 5:14): THEREFORE SHEOL HAS OPENED WIDE ITS GULLET [AND PARTED ITS MOUTH < FOR ONE > WITHOUT A STATUTE]. (A more traditional translation would read: PARTED ITS MOUTH BEYOND MEASURE.) What is the meaning of WITHOUT A STATUTE? There is no statute but circumcision. Thus it is stated (in Ps. 105:9f.): < THE COVENANT > WHICH HE CUT WITH ABRAHAM…. AND WHICH HE ESTABLISHED FOR JACOB AS A STATUTE. But the Israelites, because they are circumcised, are saved from it. Thus it is stated (in Is. 43:2): WHEN YOU PASS THROUGH THE WATERS, < I WILL BE WITH YOU >.

(Gen. 47:29:) THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR ISRAEL TO DIE DREW NEAR…. This text is related (to I Chron. 29:15): FOR WE ARE SOJOURNERS BEFORE YOU AND TRANSIENTS LIKE ALL OUR ANCESTORS; {FOR} OUR DAYS UPON EARTH ARE [LIKE] A SHADOW, AND THERE IS NO HOPE. (Gen. R. 96:2; Tanh., Gen. 12:1.) And < they are > not like the shadow of a wall or like the shadow of a tree. Rather they are like the shadow of a bird, as stated (in Ps. 144:4): {OUR} [HIS] DAYS ARE LIKE A PASSING SHADOW. (Eccl. R. 1:2:1.) (I Chron. 29:15, end:) AND THERE IS NO HOPE: There is no one who does not expect to die. All know that they are going to die. Abraham said (in Gen. 15:2): FOR I AM GOING (i.e., dying) CHILDLESS. Isaac said (in Gen. 27:4): BEFORE I DIE. Jacob said (in Gen. 47:30): WHEN I SLEEP WITH MY ANCESTORS. When? When he was on the point of death (according to Gen. 47:29): THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR ISRAEL TO DIE DREW NEAR.

[(Genesis 47:29:) THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR ISRAEL TO DIE DREW NEAR.] This text is related (to Eccl. 8:8): NO HUMAN HAS CONTROL OVER THE WIND TO CONTAIN THE WIND, NOR IS THERE CONTROL ON THE DAY OF DEATH. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi: In regard to the trumpets which Moses made in the desert (according to Numb. 10:1-10) when he was at the point of death, the Holy One hid them lest he blow on them (the trumpets) for them (the Israelites) to come to him. < This act was > to fulfill what is stated (in Eccl. 8:8): < NO HUMAN HAS CONTROL OVER THE WIND TO CONTAIN THE WIND >, NOR IS THERE CONTROL ON THE DAY OF DEATH. (Tanh., Gen. 12:2; Gen. R. 96:3; Numb. R. 15:15; Eccl. R. 8:8:1.)

And also in the case of David, it is written of him (in I Kings 1:1): NOW KING DAVID WAS OLD. Then, when he was about to die, what is written (in I Kings 2:1)? THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR DAVID TO DIE DREW NEAR. "King David" is not written here but THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR DAVID < TO DIE > DREW NEAR. (I.e., David lost the royal title shortly before his death. Deut. R. 9:3.) And also in the case of Jacob, when he was at the point of death, he began humiliating himself with Joseph and said (in Gen. 47:29): PLEASE, IF I HAVE FOUND FAVOR IN YOUR EYES. When? When he was approaching death (according to the beginning of the verse): THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR ISRAEL TO DIE DREW NEAR.

Another interpretation (of Gen. 47:29). What is the meaning of DREW NEAR? Resh Laqish said: The Holy One said to him (Jacob): By your life, you are being hidden (from the world), but you are not dying. (Gen. R. 96:4.) (Gen. 47:29:) THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR ISRAEL TO DIE DREW NEAR. (I.e., since the time only DREW NEAR but never fully arrived, Jacob did not quite die. Thus, in the description of his so-called death (in vs. 31), Jacob merely BOWED DOWN UPON THE HEAD OF THE BED. Cf. Ta‘an. 5b, according to which Jacob lived on through his offspring.)

Another interpretation (of Gen. 47:29). What is the meaning of DREW NEAR? The day (of your death) cries out against you for saying that it should stand still. < The situation > is like someone who says: So-and-so has drawn near < to fight > against his friend. Ergo (in Gen. 47:29): DREW NEAR. (“Draw near” can be used in the sense of “attack” in Hebrew. The midrash here is picturing a person’s last day crying out against any attempt to extend life by trying to keep the day from ending.)

Our masters have said: Everyone about whom a drawing near was stated never attained the age of his ancestors. It is written (in I Kings 2:1): THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR DAVID TO DIE DREW NEAR; so he did not attain the age of his ancestors Boaz, Obed, and Jesse. Our masters have said: They lived more than four hundred years < in all > ; David only lived seventy years. He did not reach the age of his ancestors; therefore, a drawing near was written about him. Amram was alive a hundred and thirty {-three} [-seven] years, but Moses (his son) only lived to a hundred and twenty. Therefore, a drawing near is written about him (in Deut. 31:14): BEHOLD, THE DAYS ARE DRAWING NEAR FOR YOU TO DIE. And in the case of Jacob, a drawing near is written about him because he did not attain the age of his ancestors. Abraham lived a hundred and seventy-five years; Isaac, a hundred and eighty; but Jacob, a hundred and forty-seven. Therefore, a drawing near is written about him (in Gen. 47:29): THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR ISRAEL TO DIE DREW NEAR.

(Gen. 47:29, cont.:) HE SUMMONED HIS SON JOSEPH. Why did he not call Reuben and Judah? (Tanh., Gen. 12:3; Gen. R. 96:5.) Reuben was the first-born, and Judah was a king; yet he left them alone and called Joseph. < It is > simply because the power to act was in his hand. Therefore: HE SUMMONED HIS SON JOSEPH.

(Gen. 47:29, cont.:) AND SAID [TO HIM]: PLEASE, IF I HAVE FOUND FAVOR IN YOUR EYES, < PLEASE PUT YOUR HAND UNDER MY THIGH > AND ACT TOWARD ME WITH FIDELITY AND TRUTH. But is there a false fidelity for him to say WITH FIDELITY AND TRUTH? Why < then did he speak > so? A common (Gk.: idiotes, which means “amateur.”) < Aramaic > proverb says: When your friend's son dies, suffer < with him >; when your friend dies, cut loose < from sorrow >. < Jacob > said to him: If you act towards me with fidelity after my death, that is true fidelity.

(Gen. 47:29, cont.:) PLEASE DO NOT BURY ME IN EGYPT. Why? Because the end of Egypt is to be smitten with lice, and they would be swarming under my body. (Gen. R. 96:5(6).) Therefore: PLEASE DO NOT BURY ME IN EGYPT.

Another interpretation (of Gen. 49:29, cont.): Jacob said: So that the Egyptians would not be redeemed through me, since they are likened to the ass. It is so stated (in Ezek. 23:20): WHOSE FLESH IS LIKE THE FLESH OF ASSES. And I have been likened to the flock, where it is stated (in Jer. 50:17): ISRAEL IS A SCATTERED FLOCK. It is also written (in Exod. 34:20): BUT THE FIRSTLING OF AN ASS YOU SHALL REDEEM WITH A LAMB. Lest they be redeemed through me, for that reason (according to Gen. 47:29), PLEASE DO NOT BURY ME IN EGYPT.

And the time drew near that Israel must die (Gen. 47:29). It is stated in Scripture in reference to this verse: For we are strangers before Thee, and sojourners, as all our fathers were; our days on the earth are as a shadow, and there is no hoping (I Chron. 29:15). Our days are as a shadow. Would that they were as the shadow of a wall or a tree, (That our days might be as permanent as a wall.) but the fact is that they are as the shadow of a bird, as it is said: His days are as a shadow that passeth away (Ps. 144:14).

And the time drew near that Israel must die (Gen. 47:29). Scripture states elsewhere in allusion to this verse: There is no man that hath power over the spirit to retain the spirit; neither hath he power over the day of death; and there is no discharge in war; neither shall wickedness deliver him that is given to it (Eccles. 8:8). R. Joshua of Sikhnin declared in the name of R. Levi: Prior to the death of Moses, the Holy One, blessed be He, hid the shofars that Moses had fashioned in the wilderness, lest some person (Moses) might blow upon them and cause all the Israelites to assemble before him. (In an attempt to postponse his death. Some copies of the parallel passage Bereshit Rabbah 96:3 imply that the subject of “should not blow them” is Moses.) He did this to fulfill the verse Neither hath he power over the day of death.

And he called his son Joseph (Gen. 47:29). Why did he not summon Reuben or Judah? After all, Reuben was the firstborn, while Judah was a king. He ignored them and called Joseph instead. He did so to teach us that one must pay homage to the person who is in power at the moment; moreover, Joseph had the power to fulfill his desires. And he said to him: “If now I have found favor in thy sight … bury me not, I pray thee, in Egypt (Gen. 47:29). It was for your sake that I descended to Egypt, and it was because of you that I said: Now let me die. Even the soul of a man who dies on shipboard joins his fathers, and so when I sleep with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me in their burying-place (ibid., v. 30).” They cherished their burial place. The grave that I have digged (ibid. 50:5). And deal kindly and truly with me (ibid. 47:29). Is there false kindness that he should say to him kindly and truly? The proverb says: When your friend’s son dies, share his sorrow; but when your friend dies, cast off your sorrow. (A cynical proverb. Console him on the death of his son, for he will console you if your son dies. However, if he dies, cast off your sorrow, for his son will not be concerned about you or your sympathy.) He said to him, in other words: “If you are kind to me after my death, that will be true kindness. Bury me not in Egypt, for it will eventually be smitten with vermin, and they will swarm over me.” Hence it says: Bury me not, I pray thee, in Egypt.

And it came to pass after these things (Gen. 48:1). What is written previously on this subject? And the time drew near that Israel must die, and he called his son Joseph (Gen. 47:29). He called his son Joseph because he (Joseph) was in a position of authority at that time.

And Jacob sat in the land (Gen. 37:1). Whenever Scripture uses the expression and he sat (also translated “and he dwelt”), it connotes misfortune: And Israel sat in the land of Egypt, in the land of Goshen, … and the time drew near that Israel must die (Gen. 47:29); And the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to make merry (Exod. 32:6); And there fell of the people on that day three thousand men (Exod. 32:28); And they sat down to eat bread; and they lifted up their eyes and looked, and, behold, a caravan of Ishmaelites (Gen. 37:25); And Judah and Israel sat safely (I Kings 5:5); And the Lord raised up an adversary against Solomon (ibid. 11:14); And Israel sat among the cedars, etc., and the people began to commit harlotry (Num. 25:1). You may explain every other use of “and he sat” with this negative implication. In this instance And Jacob sat is followed by and Joseph brought evil report of them unto his father (Gen. 37:2).

Do not gather with the sins of my soul. These are the stoned and burned. And with people of blood, my life. These are the killed and strangled. Another matter, these are the Egyptians. For Jacob says (Genesis 47:29) "Please do not bury me in Egypt." Rabbi Yochanan said we find in two places about the righteous who pray that they not be gathered with the wicked. Daniel said (Daniel 2:18) "to request compassion from the God of Heaven concerning this secret, so that Daniel and his companions would not be destroyed." David said, "Do not gather with the sins of my soul." Rabbi Chalfata in the name of Rabbi Ibu said (1 Samuel 25:38) "And it came to pass about ten days later, that the Lord struck Nabal, and he died." But isn't a plague only for three? It was taught: On one day, the death of anger; for two, death by panic; for three, death by plague. And Rabbi Chalfata ben Shaul taught: for four, death by excision; for five, the suffocating death (see Masechet Shabbat); for six, the death mentioned in the Torah; for seven, the death of love; and from here onwards, the death of suffering. What did you see to say that Nabal died from the plague? But the scripture connected his death to the seven days of mourning for Samuel the Righteous so that he would not interfere with the mourning and die in a plague. Rabbi Brechia in the name of Rabbi Samuel said, "And it came to pass about ten days." It does not say here "and it came to pass about ten days." Rather, it says "the days." These are the ten days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, so that one may repent. And it was recorded that the man touched the bones of Elisha and came back to life and stood on his feet. He returned to his house, but he only lived for an hour and died and was buried elsewhere, as it says "Do not gather with the sins of my soul." And who was the son of the Shunammite woman? As it says (2 Kings 4:18) "And it came to pass on a certain day that he came and went into his father." And "And it came to pass after seven days that the waters of the flood were upon the earth" (Genesis 7:10). Rav Hoshaya said that this teaches us that the Holy One, blessed be He, waited for seven days of mourning for Methuselah the righteous to repent, but he did not repent. This is based on the verse "Do not gather my soul with sinners".

Rabbi Eliezer said: In the hour of the death of Jacob he called to his son Joseph, and said to him: O my son! Swear to me by the covenant of circumcision that thou wilt take me up to the burial-place of my fathers in the land of Canaan to the Cave of Machpelah. The ancients used to swear by the covenant of circumcision prior to the giving of the Torah, as it is said, "Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh" (Gen. 47:29), and "he sware unto him" (Gen. 47:31). He kept (the oath) and did (accordingly), as it is said, "And he said, Swear unto me" (ibid.). And all the mighty men of the kingdom went up with him to bury him, and to show loving-kindness to Jacob his father, as it is said, "And Joseph went up to bury his father" (Gen. 50:7). The camp of Israel numbered 5040 (people). All the (people of the) land were bringing food on account of the famine to the camp of Joseph. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: Ye have shown loving-kindness to Jacob, My servant, I also will give you your reward, and also unto your children in this world. When the Egyptians died in the Reed Sea they did not die in the water, but they were deemed worthy to be buried in the earth. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: Ye have submitted yourselves to the divine punishment; I also will give you a place of burial, as it is said, "Thou stretchedst forth thy right hand, the earth swallowed them" (Ex. 15:12).

Our forefather Avraham, on the other hand, merited both old age as well as beneficial days. Thus the plain meaning of the Midrash is that Avraham enjoyed a desirable lot even in this world. In fact, the Sages tell us in Baba Basra (16b) that there were three people to whom the Holy One Blessed is He gave a taste of the World to Come while they were yet in this world. They were: Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov. As it is written, “With everything” (Bereishis 24:1), “From everything” (ibid. 27:33), “Everything” (ibid. 33:11). However, I have heard a deeper explanation of the Midrash in the name of my illustrious mentor, Rabbi Yudel, ztz”l, president of the court and dean of the yeshiva of the holy community of Kauli. It is based upon a passage in the Zohar (Parashas Vayechi 221b) commenting on the verse, “And the days approached for Yisrael to die” (Bereishis 47:29). The Zohar asks: “On how many days does a person die (i.e. why is “days” in the plural)? Does the soul not exit in a single moment?” Explains the Zohar: When a person passes from this world all his days come for a reckoning before the Holy One Blessed is He. Not one is omitted. If a person behaved righteously and feared Hashem continually, if he clung to Him lovingly every day and was whole in his commitment to Torah, fear of Heaven, mitzvos and good deeds, then all his days will be crowned and garbed with splendor and majesty.

ועשית עמדי חסד ואמת . The main ingredient of חסד, kindness, is that it be performed without expectation of a reward. Only when performed thus is one called generous; otherwise one is simply a trader. There is no greater virtue than that of חסד. This is why a person must train himself to practice this virtue until it becomes second nature to him. Not only should he perform acts of kindness for the dead, but even more so for the living. By doing so he will emulate the virtues practiced by G–d Himself who constantly performs acts of kindness without any thought of compensation. Concerning this David has said in Psalms 63,4: "For truly Your kindness is better than life itself; my lips declare Your praise." David meant that whereas when human beings practice acts of altruistic loving-kindness, this is almost always with the dead. You, G–d, perform deeds of loving-kindness for the living, by the very fact that You grant us our life. What could we possibly do in the way of compensating You!? All we can do is to pay You lip-service, extol Your virtues in song and prayer. Rashi referred to this in his commentary on 49,21, where he interprets the אמרי שפר as an allusion to the song of victory sung by Deborah after Israel defeated Sisera under her leadership. G–d performs the miracles and all we can do in return is to acknowledge them with our lips.

The positive commandment mentioned in our portion is that of גמילות חסד, the performing of a deed of loving kindness, and specifically that of performing a service for a person after he has died. Such deeds are called the true גמילות חסד. Jacob described the act of burying his remains in ארץ ישראל as such an act of loving kindness. Attending to the burial of a departed, or performing rites of mourning as described near the end of our פרשה are all part of this מצוה. All of this comes under the heading of the positive commandment: והלכת בדרכיו, "You shall walk in His ways, which the סמ"ג enumerates in his list of the 248 positive commandments. I have copied the exact words of the סמ"ג on this subject at the beginning of פרשת וירא.

When Abraham made Eliezer swear that he would not take Isaac back to Charan, he made him swear by the organ on which circumcision had been performed, an organ that therefore had become dear to him, the symbol of the covenant with G–d (Genesis 24,3). Granted that there were good reasons then for the method employed by Abraham, why did Jacob request that Joseph, his son, perform the oath in the same manner by placing his hand on his father's organ (47,29)? Why did Joseph not mention the symbol of the oath that he made the brothers swear by when he in turn requested that the brothers swear they would take his remains with them when the time came for the redemption from Egypt (50,25)?

Rabbi Zecharyah on the other hand, refers to the period after the name Jacob had been revived because Jacob was revived. After that development, the name Jacob, representing also a life of infinite duration, became more important than the name Israel. A careful look at the wording in that Midrash reveals that whereas the first sage described the name Israel as the principal name and Jacob as merely "auxiliary," Rabbi Zecharyah did not speak of something "auxiliary." He defined the name Israel as "additional." This choice of adjective is appropriate, seeing it alludes to the additional dimension of spiritual content the letters 231=ראל added to the letters א-ל, as described. When the Torah spoke about the "days when Israel would die approaching," this was phrased so as to alert us to the fact that only Israel, but not Jacob was to die. When the Torah -through the mouth of Bileam- speaks about both Jacob and Israel in Numbers 23,23, this is because both names are used in their spiritual, eternal dimension.

הן קרבו ימיך למות, "Behold, your days are drawing near to die, etc." The reason for the word הן here is to justify Moses' having said that he had reached his 120th birthday on that day. Our sages in Rosh Hashanah 11 mention that by the word היום in verse 2 Moses meant that he reached the age allotted to him. As a result, G'd's word came to him saying: הן, "you are correct," the time has come for you to die. The reason G'd said קרבו ימיך (pl.) instead of saying קרב יומך, "your day has arrived (sing.)" may be understood in the same vein as Genesis 47,29 where we have explained this wording.

וילך משה, "Moses went, etc." We need to know where Moses went. Yonathan ben Uzziel translates that Moses went to the study hall. Other commentators such as Nachmanides and Rabbeynu Bachyah say that he went from the camp of the Levites to the encampment of the Israelites much like a man who takes leave from his friends. The wording of the Torah is vague and does not provide a clue as to where Moses actually went. Another thing we are entitled to know is who told Moses that he would die on that day. Have we not been told in Shabbat 30 that man is not informed of precisely how long he will live? If that is correct, who told Moses that he would die on that day?

Having read all this you may ask how it was that Moses knew that he would die on that day and not 40 days later seeing we said that the soul leaves 40 days before one's death? Read what I have written on Genesis 47,29 "Israel's days to die approached."

הן קרבו ימיך למות, “here your days to die are drawing near.” According to the plain meaning of the text this verse teaches that the period man has to live has been predetermined, every single human being having a time allocated to him at birth. G’d sees to it that every person lives out the time thus allocated to him at birth. This would correspond to Exodus 23,26: “I will ensure that you complete the number of your days (years).” The expression קריבה, “approach,” mentioned here is one which is specifically reserved for the approach of death of righteous people as we know already from Genesis 47,29 when the Torah speaks about the approaching death of Israel our patriarch. Similarly, Kings I 2,1: “the time for David to die approached.” These verses prove that such times had been determined by G’d already at birth, and that G’d’s השגחה, “benevolent supervision of history,” ensures that the individuals in question get to live out their allotted time, that their lives are not cut short by acts of violence or natural disasters. Alternatively, G’d lengthens the allotted life span of these people as a reward for merits which they have accumulated during their lives. At the same time, their allotted life span may be reduced due to demerits they have become guilty of. The important thing is that no one dies unless G’d has so determined. According to our information that G’d has empowered planetary forces, stars and their constellations, to exercise their influence on the lives of people on terrestrial earth, and the orbits of these forces are of constructive or destructive influence on these lives so that their lives appear to depend on mazal,” i.e. such influences (Targum Kohelet 9,2), we find that our sages did not deny the impact of such mazal; we therefore seem to be faced with a dilemma here. Our sages said specifically that phenomena such as economic success, (duration of) life on earth itself, as well as the ability to have children, do not depend on one’s merit but on one’s mazal (Moed Katan 28). If that is so, where is there room for G’d’s השגחה in the matter? Further details of our sages’ view is found in their statement that though both Rabbah and Rav Chisdah were righteous individuals (seeing that when they prayed for rain it materialised), one lived only to the age of 40 whereas the other lived to the age of 92. Rabbah’s 40 years on earth were filled with painful experiences. Rav Chisdah was blessed to marry off 60 children, whereas Rabbah buried 60 family members. The latter could not always afford to eat even bread made from barley, whereas the former fed his dogs with white bread. These statements are proof positive that the sages acknowledged the influence of mazal in our lives, i.e. that there is substance to the discipline we call astrology. It is true that these planetary phenomena have been equipped with initial power to influence our fates. However, they are not supreme. Their influence need not be final. They are subservient to the Lord Almighty, to the attribute Hashem. If people born under adverse mazal turn to the supreme G’d, to Hashem, and appeal to Him to neutralize their apparently negative mazal, G’d will respond to such prayer if it is warranted. In fact, we may go further and posit that G’d instituted mazal partly in order to encourage us to pray to Him to change adverse mazal in His benevolent way. We know that G’d can lengthen our lives from the very verse in Exodus 23,26: “I will make full the number of your days,” i.e. “I will add to them if the situation warrants.” King Chizkiyah had 15 years added to his life expectancy although the prophet Isaiah had been sent to him to prepare his last will and testament as he was not going to recover from his sickness. G’d responded to his prayer and revoked the decree he had been subject to (Isaiah 38,5). We also know that when the occasion warrants it G’d reduces the number of years allocated to a person at birth, from Achazyah King of Israel son of Achav. The reason he had his life span shortened was that when he fell ill, instead of turning to G’d or to an accredited prophet, he turned to idols to inquire about his chances of a recovery (compare Kings II 1,16). He was told clearly that he would die now because he had turned to Baal Zevuv, the god of Akron, ignoring the presence of accredited prophets in Israel. The verse we just quoted makes it plain that Achazya’s death at that time was due to his having turned to idols at that time. Had death already have been decreed upon him previously, what point was there in the prophet telling him about it now? The above examples teach us that G’d reserves the right to lengthen or shorten the life span decreed for man at birth. G’d remains a free agent; this is why He is known as שדי. The word, derived from שדד, means that He is in charge of the laws of nature, changing them at will if He so desires. (Compare author’s comments on Genesis 17,1) These adjustments in life span, etc., occur with a view to reward and punishment. It follows that the statement that “life (expectancy), children (ability to have them), and economic success, do not depend on merit but on mazal,” which we quoted from Moed Katan, means that the power of prayer is so great that it can override predetermined fates set according to mazal. The astrologers themselves admit that the general rules are set by G’d, whereas the planetary systems only supplement details pertaining to the lives of the subjects under their influence. Clearly, He who sets the general rules is able to set aside mere details, i.e. the subordinate powers assigned to the horoscopes. It follows that it is within man’s power to create the conditions for setting aside such details if his actions merit it and he appeals to the Lord to use His powers on his behalf. On occasion, G’d fulfills man’s desire without waiting for man to appeal to Him. What the statement in Moed Katan, regarding the three cardinal parts of man’s fate does mean is that in these matters G’d does not interfere with the predetermined fates of these individuals unless asked, unless appealed to. This is the meaning of Psalms 145,19 ואת שועתם ישמע ויושיעים, “and their cry He hears and He delivers them.” On the other hand, the same psalmist says in the first half of this verse: “He does the will of those who fear Him;” this refers to the unspoken requests by these people. We have proof positive from the Torah and the Books of Prophets that the three critical values of man, 1) children, 2) life, and 3) economic success, פרנסה, are all subject to prayer. Rachel, who had been unable to conceive and had prayed was granted children (Genesis 30,22): “G’d listened to her and opened her womb.” King Chizkiyah provided proof for the fact that G’d changes even decrees of death announced by one of His prophets at His command. Elijah and Elisha both experienced that the supply of food was dramatically increased through their prayerful intervention in the fates of starving individuals (Kings I 17,13-15 and Kings II 5,42-44). These individuals were saved from famine, although clearly that had been their assigned fate. This is the reason why our sages singled out these three aspects of life which are normally dependent on mazal to inform us that even these matters are subject to change by means of prayer by the intended victims.

שים נא ידך תחת ירכי, it was customary to make a person reinforce the promise that he would carry out an assignment by his placing his hand within the control of his master. This was a symbolic gesture meaning that just as his hand was under the control of his master so his personality would be under the control of his master to carry out his assignment. This was such a firmly established custom that the gesture itself was equivalent to swearing an oath. We find that in Genesis 47,29 when Yaakov wants an assurance from his son Joseph that he would not bury him in Egypt but in the land of Canaan, that he requests the same symbolic gesture from Joseph. There are commentators who understand this verse as Avraham requesting an oath from Eliezer. If that were correct, the Torah should have used the familiar formula of ואשביעך בה' אלוקי השמים, “I want you to swear in the name of the Lord of the Heavens to carry out this specific task.” [we must understand the author to mean that the oath and the symbol should have been part of the same verse if indeed placing his hand within the control of his master had been part of the oath. Ed.]

Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Everywhere that it is stated: And he dwelt, it is nothing other than an expression of pain, of an impending calamity, as it is stated: “And Israel dwelt in Shittim, and the people began to commit harlotry with the daughters of Moab” (Numbers 25:1). It is stated: “And Jacob dwelt in the land where his father had sojourned in the land of Canaan” (Genesis 37:1), and it is stated thereafter: “And Joseph brought evil report of them to his father” (Genesis 37:2), which led to the sale of Joseph. And it is stated: “And Israel dwelt in the land of Egypt in the land of Goshen” (Genesis 47:27), and it is stated thereafter: “And the time drew near that Israel was to die” (Genesis 47:29). It is stated: “And Judah and Israel dwelt safely, every man under his vine and under his fig tree” (I Kings 5:5), and it is stated thereafter: “And the Lord raised up an adversary to Solomon, Hadad the Edomite; he was of the king’s seed in Edom” (I Kings 11:14).

And Abraham said to the senior servant of his household, who had charge of all that he owned, “Put your hand under my thigh

The days of Yisrael’s death drew near, and he called for his son Yoseif, and said to him, If I have found favor in your eyes, please [now], place your hand under my thigh; that you will deal kindly [with goodness] and truthfully with me. Please [Now], do not bury me in Egypt.

And the days of Israel drew near to die. And he called to his son, to Joseph, and said to him, If now I have found favour before thee, put thy hand on the place of my circumcision, and deal with me in goodness and truth, That thou wilt not bury me in Mizraim,

According to Jewish mystics, Joseph was the paradigm of virtue and righteousness, the personification of tzaddik yesod olam, a man of such holiness that his merit sustains the entire world. Joseph was also Jacob’s favorite son, and they shared a special relationship. (See Gen. 30:25 and Rashi’s comment on that verse; Gen. 37:2 and the respective Rashi; also Gen. 37:11, 37:35, 45:27-28.) When Jacob lay dying he called Joseph and requested burial in the Land of Israel. Although Joseph promised that he would ensure his father’s interment in Israel (Gen. 47:30), Jacob was not satisfied and demanded that an oath be sworn in God’s name: “And he [Jacob] said ‘Swear to me’ and he [Joseph] swore to him, and Israel [another name for Jacob] bowed back toward the head of the bed” (Gen. 47:31).

ושכבתי עם אבותי, “I wish to have my last resting place with my forefathers;” he referred to his grave. He realised that this could be done only if Joseph would transport his remains all the way to the cave of Machpelah. An alternate explanation: When using the words ושכבתי עם אבותי, Yaakov referred to being buried in Egypt, temporarily, whereas when adding: אל נא תקברני במצרים, he asked Joseph not to make his permanent grave in Egypt. This corresponds to what we have learned in the Talmud tractate Nazir 64: “if someone is found buried in a normal fashion, (but not in a graveyard) when transferring the corpse to a Jewish graveyard, he should take along a certain amount of the earth surrounding the corpse with it. When applied to Yaakov, this means that some Egyptian soil was taken with his corpse on his way to be deposited also in the cave of Machpelah. The Talmud there defines how much soil, (approx 3 fingers deep of earth). Yaakov too referred to this amount of Egyptian soil, when he said: ונשאתני ממצרים, “and carry me up from Egypt.”

כדברך, “as you have said.” The word is spelled without the letter י, i.e. in the singular mode.

אנכי אעשה כדבריך, “I am going to do in accordance with your instructions.” According to the Midrash, Yaakov’s request to be buried in the land of Canaan inspired Joseph to make the same request of his brothers when the time came for him to die. We find that Joseph indeed made his brothers swear that his remains would be taken with the Israelites at the time of the redemption, and Moses personally, was involved in locating his coffin which was carried with the Israelites for 40 years until eventually being interred near Sh’chem in the tribal territory of Ephraim, one of his sons. He used the same formula when making his request as had his father at the time. (Compare Genesis 50,24-26) The choice of the Torah describing Joseph’s response as “the words of” instead of simply “his request,” or something similar, is why Rashi (in Exodus 3,18) says that before Moses came to Egypt and introduced himself as the redeemer, G–d told him that the elders would listen to him as he introduced himself with the words: פקוד יפקוד, that Joseph had used at the time when he stood at his father’s deathbed and they spoke about the eventual redemption, long before even the enslavement had commenced. This was also the reason why Yaakov had used this formula for describing the redemption.

I (anochi) will do as you say. Yoseif declined to place his hand under his father’s thigh on the grounds that it was beneath his dignity. Instead he indicated through his use of the more formal anochi rather than the more common ani that for a man of his station a mere promise was sufficient.

BUT WHEN I SLEEP WITH MY FATHERS. This is a euphemism for death. (According to this interpretation the verse reads, But when I die (when I sleep with my fathers), thou shalt carry me out of Egypt, and bury me in their burying-place.) Or it may mean: bury me not, I pray thee, in Egypt (v. 29), but I will sleep (be buried) with my fathers. (According to this interpretation, ve-shakhavti im avotai (but when I sleep with my fathers) means, but I will be buried with my fathers.) The latter will come to pass because thou shalt carry me out of Egypt and bury me in their burying place. (The verse reads, But when I sleep with my fathers, thou shalt carry me out of Egypt, and bury me in their burying place. If ve-shakhavti im avotai (but when I sleep with my fathers) means I will be buried with my fathers, then the verse is redundant, hence I.E.’s interpretation.)

ויאמר אנכי אעשה כדבריך. He said: "l will do in accordance with your instructions." Why did Joseph have to announce that he was going to do all this? All he had to do was to place his hand where his father had asked and make the promise and that would be his reply to his father's request. This is what Eliezer did when Abraham made him swear an oath concerning his selecting a wife for Isaac (Genesis 24,9).

Actually, the Torah mentions Joseph's declaration as proof that he said he did not need to swear an oath, that his promise was sufficient.

Alternatively, he meant that he was legally obligated to comply with his father's request either by dint of being his father's son or by dint of his father's request being that of a man about to die (compare Choshen Mishpat 252,2). Joseph added the word כדברך to demonstrate that he would fulfil the request quite independent of any oath he would swear.

ושכבתי עם אבותי ונשאתני ממצרים, “I wish to lie with my fathers and that you carry me up from Egypt.” The first request pertained to his spirit, the second to his body. Yaakov meant that he was convinced that even if his body were to be buried in Egypt his spirit would reside with his fathers and that it would not have to undergo painful גלגולים, metamorphoses, before arriving in its rightful place in the celestial regions. Rabbi Yitzchak claims that this verse teaches us that on the day a person dies he becomes aware of what destination he is headed for, whether he will be assigned to the region reserved for the righteous or the region reserved for the wicked. This is why Yaakov first said: “I will lie with my fathers,” and subsequently he asked Joseph to transport him there. He taught Joseph that even if one were to die on a boat or in a remote inaccessible island, one’s spirit would immediately head for the location assigned to it. We have been told that Rabbi Avohu saw the reward that was in store for him shortly before his death. The sages base this principle on Psalms 31,20: “How abundant is the good that You have in store for those who fear You, that You do in the full view of men for those that take refuge in You.” According to tradition when Rabbi Avohu was shown all the reward which was in store for him he was so overwhelmed that he could not help exclaiming: ‘is all this really in store for Avohu?!’ He immediately wished himself dead and began to recite the above quoted verse from Psalms.

וקברתני בקבורתם, “and bury me in their burial vault.” Our sages used this verse to tell us that the righteous ought to arrange that they be buried alongside other righteous people. We have a verse in Kings II 13,21 describing that someone who had been thrown into a grave next to that of the prophet Elisha emerged resurrected through having contacted the remains of the prophet. This is also what the false prophet said before he died when he requested to be buried alongside the true prophet. He had said: “you shall bury me in the grave of the prophet.” According to this interpretation the temporary resurrection of the sinner in question served the purpose of preventing him remaining buried next to the righteous man, the true prophet Elisha. (Compare Sanhedrin 47 on details of this story.)

אנכי אעשה כדברך, “I will comply with what you have said.” According to the plain meaning of the text Joseph agreed to honor his father’s request. According to a Midrashic interpretation the words mean “just as you made me swear to bring your bones up to the land of Canaan, so I will make my brothers swear to do the same for my own bones when the time comes.”

אנכי אעשה כדברך, “I will do this independently of swearing an oath. There is no need to place me under oath. [I believe that author uses the extraneous word אנכי as the reason for his exegesis. Ed.]

ושכבתי עם אבתי BUT I WILL LIE WITH MY FATHERS — This ו of ושכבתי is the connecting link with the beginning of the verse above: Put thy hand beneath my thigh and swear unto me that you will not bury me in Egypt. For I must ultimately lie with my fathers (i.e. die as all my fathers have died) and you shall carry me out of Egypt. One cannot say that “I will lie with my fathers” means “make me lie with my fathers in the cave” (i.e. bury me), for immediately after this it is written “And thou shalt carry me out of Egypt and bury me in their burying place”. Further we find that wherever the term “lying with one’s fathers” is used it denotes dying and not burial. For instance, (1 Kings 2:10) “and David lay with his fathers”, and afterwards it states “and he was buried in the city of David”.

שכבתי וגו", sich niederlegen zu seinen Vätern ist nicht das örtlich in ihrer Nähe begraben werden, sondern ist der leiblich in die Erscheinung tretende Akt des Sterbens, wie האסף die seelische Seite dieses Aktes bedeutet. האסף: das Heimgehen der Seele in die Heimat der Seelen, שכב: das Niederlegen des Leibes auf die Erde, in deren gemeinsamen Schoß, wo immer auch sie begraben seien, die vorangegangenen Eltern ruhen.

ושכבתי עם אבותי, the matter of “the deceased lying with his fathers,” is the placing the bier with the deceased at the place of the eulogy, surrounded by the mourners and those eulogising him. This is why the same expression is used throughout the Book of Kings, whether describing the burial of kings, the righteous, or the wicked.

ונשאתני ממצרים, when you will follow this procedure you will be able to carry me out of Egypt, for when the days of lying in state will have come to an end, people will no longer be in a state of sorrow over my passing, as we know from 50,4 ויעברו ימי בכיתו, and no one will protest if you will transport my remains to another country.

אנכי אעשה כדברך, I will do this on my own, making every effort to fulfill your command.

This letter ו connects this with the beginning of the previous verse... Rashi explains right afterward that ושכבתי means dying. Accordingly, Yaakov should first have said he will die, and then say, “Please do not bury me in Egypt.” Thus Rashi explains, “This letter ו connects ...”

Put me to rest with my fathers in the cave... According to which it would mean actual burial. Rashi explains ושכבתי to mean השכיבני because ושכבתי implies putting oneself down to rest, whereas burial is done by others. Thus he also adds “in the cave,” since [in this explanation] ושכבתי עם אבותי means actual burial. Accordingly, the verse means: “Put me to rest [i.e., bury me] with my fathers in the cave.”

Carry me from Egypt and bury me in their grave... Rashi is saying that there are two contradictions. 1.It should It should have written first, “Carry me out of Egypt,” and then, “I will lie,” since he must first be carried and only then buried. 2.“I will lie” is apparently repetitive because it is written afterward, “Bury me in their grave.”

“And Dovid lay with his fathers” and afterwards: “And he was buried...” Perforce, the וישכב of Dovid means death. For if it meant burial, it would indicate that they buried him with his fathers, i.e., in Beis Lechem where Dovid’s fathers lived. But then it is written, “He was buried in the City of Dovid,” implying Tzion, which is the City of Dovid. Thus it must be that שכיבה means death.

I shall lie with my fathers after my death, and you will convey me from Egypt and bury me in their, my ancestors’, grave. He, Joseph, said: I will do in accordance with your words.

אנכי אעשה כדברך, “I shall do as you have said.” I will carry out your instructions. Alternately, the meaning is that Joseph conveyed to his father that he would do what he had asked him to do because he himself would do the same when the time came, and he too would ask his brothers and children to ensure that he would eventually be interred in the Holy Land. Both Yaakov and Joseph made his son/brothers swear, even though Yaakov had already had a direct assurance by G’d before he came to Egypt that He would accompany him back to his grave in the land of Canaan. He also had no reason to doubt Joseph’s sincerity and uprightness. He wanted Joseph to render an oath so that he could use this as an argument before Pharaoh in case the latter would object to the fact that someone who had been able to stop the famine, would not be honoured by the Egyptians by being given a burial and a monument in that land. In the event, Pharaoh did give permission, stressing that it was Joseph’s duty to honour his oath to his father. (50,7)

“I will do as you have spoken” [47:30]. Joseph said: I will also do as you did. That is, you have made me swear, so too, I will make the tribes swear that they should take me to the land of Canaan. (Ibid.)

10.2. Jacob, as he is preparing for death, says in Genesis 47, ושכבתי עם־אבתי And I will lie down with my fathers (Genesis 47:30) where the expression, “I will lie down”, (שכבתי) implies the resurrection, since he who lies down naturally gets up, and by saying “with my fathers”, it includes the immortality of the soul.

For this same reason, in the death of the righteous, the Holy Scripture uses this word, to sleep, as Jacob said, ושכבתי עם־אבתי And I will have slept with my fathers (Genesis 47:30) And in some other place, וישכב דוד עם־אבתיו And David slept with his fathers (I Kings 2:10)

“The time for Israel to die approached and he called his son, Joseph, and he said to him: Please, if I have found favor in your eyes, please place your hand under my thigh and perform kindness and truth with me; please do not bury me in Egypt” (Genesis 47:29). “The time for Israel to die approached.” It is written: “For I am a stranger with You, a resident, [as were all my fathers]” (Psalms 39:13). “For we are strangers before You…our days on earth are like a shadow, and there is no hope” (I Chronicles 29:15) – if only it would be like the shadow of a wall, or the shadow of a tree, (If our life is compared to a shadow, if only it could be like the shadow of a wall or tree, which stays in place and has stability.) but instead it is like the shadow of a bird when it is flying, as it is written: “Like a passing shadow” (Psalms 144:4). “And there is no hope” – there is no one who can hope not to die. Everyone knows and says with his mouth that he will die. Abraham said: “I am going (“Going” here is in the sense of dying.) childless” (Genesis 15:2). Isaac said: “I will bless you before the Lord before my death” (Genesis 27:7). Jacob, too, said: “I will lie with my fathers” (Genesis 47:30). When [did he say this]? When he was about to die.

(Gen. 47, 30) Thou shall carry me out of Egypt, and bury me in their burying place. Said Karna: "Something unusual is meant by these words. Jacob our Patriarch knew very well that he was a perfectly righteous man, and since the dead which are buried outside of the land of Israel will also revive, then why did he trouble his children so much? We must say that it was only because of the trouble to walk through the underground passages up to the land of Israel." Similar to this may the following be explained (Ib. 50, 25) And Joseph caused the children of Israel to swear, etc. Said R. Chanina: "Something unusual is meant by this oath. Joseph knew very well that he was a perfectly righteous man, and since the dead which are buried outside of the land of Israel will also revive, then why did he trouble his brothers to carry him four hundred miles? Because he did not want to subject himself to walking through the underground passage up to the land of Israel. "Jacob knew very well that he was a perfectly righteous," etc. Illpha adds more things which Raba said to his brother: "There was once a man who fell in love with a certain woman who lived outside of the land of Israel, and he desired to go out and live there in order to marry her; but as soon as he heard the above things [that it is prohibited], he overcame his love, and remained single until the day of his death." And another thing [did he send]: "Although thou art a great sage, nevertheless the knowledge is not so good when one studies by himself as when one studies from his teacher; and if you will say that there is no teacher, you should know that here is a teacher for vou, and this is R. Jochanan. And should you finally decide not to come here, then be strict with the following three things: Do not sit too much, because sitting affects the viscera; do not stand too much, because standing affects the heart; do not walk too much, because walking affects the eyes. A third of your time spend in sitting, a third in standing and a third in walking. Standing is better than sitting on any seat that has not something to lean on." How can you say that standing is better than sitting? We must therefore say that standing (Ib. b) with something to lean on is preferable to sitting without leaning.

[(Numb. 2:2:) EACH WITH HIS STANDARD, UNDER THE BANNERS FOR THEIR FATHERS' HOUSE. This text is related] (to Job 36:3): I WILL FETCH MY KNOWLEDGE FROM AFAR, AND JUSTIFY MY MAKER. It was only necessary to say: "Each under his standard"; [under the banners shall the children of Israel camp.] (Tanh., Numb. 1:11; Numb. R. 2:8.) Then what is the significance of saying (in Numb. 2:2:) WITH HIS STANDARD, UNDER THE BANNERS [FOR THEIR FATHERS' HOUSE]. Simply that when our father Jacob departed from this world, he said to them (in Gen. 47:30): WHEN I SLEEP WITH MY ANCESTORS, YOU ARE TO TAKE ME UP FROM EGYPT AND BURY ME IN THEIR GRAVE. He went around to all his sons, blessed them, and gave them a charge. He said to them: When you take me, you are to take me with reverence and honor. Let no other person, neither one of the Egyptians nor one of your children, touch my bier, because there are some among them who have taken from the daughters of Canaan. (Cf. Gen. R. 84:21; PRK 39, according to which there was no such intermarriage.) And so it says (in Gen. 50:12-13): SO HIS CHILDREN DID FOR HIM JUST AS HE HAD COMMANDED THEM, [IN THAT HIS CHILDREN BROUGHT HIM UP TO THE LAND OF CANAAN]. His children, but not his grandchildren (who were forbidden to touch the bier)! {(Gen. 50:13): IN THAT HIS CHILDREN BROUGHT HIM UP TO THE LAND OF CANAAN.} How did he charge them? He said to them: Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun shall carry my bier on the east; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, on the south; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, on the west; Dan, Asher, and Naphtali, on the north. Joseph is not to carry , because he is a king; but you must impart honor to him. Nor is Levi to carry. Why? Because he carries the ark (aron), and whoever carries the ark of the One who Lives Forever is not to carry a coffin (aron) of the dead. If you do this and carry my bier, just as I have charged you, the Holy One is going to have you encamp by the various standards. When he passed away, they carried him just as he had charged them. It is so stated (in Numb. 5:12): SO HIS CHILDREN DID FOR HIM JUST AS HE HAD COMMANDED THEM. What is written next (in vs. 13)? HIS CHILDREN BROUGHT HIM UP TO THE LAND OF CANAAN, when Israel went forth from Egypt. The Holy One said: Now is the time for them to make standards, just as their father had proclaimed to them that they were going to make standards. Immediately the Holy One said to Moses: Make those standards for my name. Immediately Moses began to be concerned. He said: There is going to be dissension among the tribes. If I tell the tribe of Judah to encamp in the east, they will say: It is impossible for us to encamp anywhere but in the south. And so each and every tribe like that one. The Holy One said to him: [What concern is that to you?] They do not need you in this matter. They will recognize their dwellings by themselves. Why? Because their father's will was in their hand on how to encamp by the standards. I am not establishing something new. They already have their father's arrangements (Gk.: taxeis.) in their hands. Just as they have taken positions around his bier, so let them take positions around the Tabernacle. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Numb. 2:2): EACH WITH HIS STANDARD, UNDER THE BANNERS [FOR THEIR FATHERS' HOUSE].

(Gen. 47:29:) THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR ISRAEL TO DIE DREW NEAR…. This text is related (to I Chron. 29:15): FOR WE ARE SOJOURNERS BEFORE YOU AND TRANSIENTS LIKE ALL OUR ANCESTORS; {FOR} OUR DAYS UPON EARTH ARE [LIKE] A SHADOW, AND THERE IS NO HOPE. (Gen. R. 96:2; Tanh., Gen. 12:1.) And < they are > not like the shadow of a wall or like the shadow of a tree. Rather they are like the shadow of a bird, as stated (in Ps. 144:4): {OUR} [HIS] DAYS ARE LIKE A PASSING SHADOW. (Eccl. R. 1:2:1.) (I Chron. 29:15, end:) AND THERE IS NO HOPE: There is no one who does not expect to die. All know that they are going to die. Abraham said (in Gen. 15:2): FOR I AM GOING (i.e., dying) CHILDLESS. Isaac said (in Gen. 27:4): BEFORE I DIE. Jacob said (in Gen. 47:30): WHEN I SLEEP WITH MY ANCESTORS. When? When he was on the point of death (according to Gen. 47:29): THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR ISRAEL TO DIE DREW NEAR.

(Gen. 47:30:) WHEN I SLEEP WITH MY ANCESTORS…. Why do all the ancestors search for and cherish burial in the land of Israel? (Gen. R. 96:5(7).) R. Hananiah said: R. Joshua ben Levi said: There is a reason for this (in Ps. 116:9): I WILL WALK BEFORE THE LORD IN THE LANDS OF THE LIVING. Our masters have said two things in the name of R. Helbo: Why did the ancestors cherish the land of Israel for burial? Because the dead in the land of Israel shall be the first to revive in the days of the Messiah and enjoy the messianic years. (See above, 7:23, and the references noted there.) R. Hama b. R. Hanina said: The one who dies outside of the land and is buried there has two deaths. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Jer. 20:6): YOU ALSO, PASHUR, AND ALL WHO DWELL IN YOUR HOUSE SHALL GO INTO CAPTIVITY. SO YOU SHALL COME TO BABYLON, WHERE YOU SHALL DIE AND WHERE YOU SHALL BE BURIED, YOU ALONG WITH ALL YOUR FRIENDS TO WHOM YOU PROPHESIED FALSELY. (The burial outside Israel is seen here as the second death.) R. Simon said: If so, are the righteous who are buried outside the land at a disadvantage? So what does the Holy One do? He {goes back to} [bores through] the land before them and makes them like skin bottles (See yKet. 12:3 (35b); cf. the parallel in Tanh., Gen. 11:3: “He makes cavities for them in the land and makes them (the cavities) like these caverns….” Cf. also Ket. 111b.) so that they come rolling < on through > until they arrive in the land of Israel. Then, when they arrive in the land of Israel, he puts the spirit of life in them; and they arise. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Ezek. 37:12): BEHOLD, I WILL OPEN YOUR GRAVES … < O MY PEOPLE, AND BRING YOU UNTO THE LAND OF ISRAEL >. Then afterwards (in vs. 14): AND I WILL PUT MY SPIRIT WITHIN YOU SO THAT YOU SHALL LIVE. Resh Laqish said: Scripture clearly states that, when they arrive in the land of Israel, the Holy One puts breath in them, as stated (in Is. 42:5): WHO GIVES BREATH TO THE PEOPLE UPON IT (The antecedent of IT is ha’arets, which is usually translated here as THE EARTH but can also mean THE LAND.) AND SPIRIT TO THOSE WHO WALK THEREON.

(Gen. 47:30:) WHEN I SLEEP WITH MY ANCESTORS. Jacob said to Joseph: If you do for me as I tell you, well and good; but, if not, my soul shall depart from me. He said to him: I am doing so for you! He said to him (in vs. 31): SWEAR < … >! AND HE SWORE TO HIM. When he had departed, what is written (in Gen. 50:12)? SO HIS CHILDREN DID FOR HIM [JUST] AS HE HAD COMMANDED THEM. The Holy One said: In this world death does not allow one to rejoice, but in the world to come (according to Is. 25:8): HE WILL SWALLOW UP DEATH FOREVER…. When death departs, what is written (Is. 65:19)? I WILL ALSO SHOUT FOR JOY IN JERUSALEM AND REJOICE IN MY PEOPLE. THEN NEVER AGAIN SHALL BE HEARD THERE THE SOUND OF WEEPING AND THE SOUND OF CRYING OUT.

(Numb. 2:2:) “Each with his standard, under the banners for their fathers' house.” [This text is related] (to Job 36:3), “I will fetch my knowledge from afar, and justify my maker.” It was only necessary to say, "under the banners shall the Children of Israel camp. (Numb. R. 2:8.) Then what is the significance of saying (in Numb. 2:2), “under the banners [for their fathers' house].” Simply that when our father Jacob departed from this world, he said to them (in Gen. 47:30), “When I sleep with my ancestors, you are to take me up from Egypt and bury me in their grave.” He went around to all his sons, blessed them, and gave them a charge. He said to them, “When you take me, you are to take me with reverence and honor. Let no other person, neither one of the Egyptians nor one of your children, touch my bier, because there are some among them who have taken [wives] from the daughters of Canaan. (Cf. Gen. R. 84:21; PRK 39, according to which there was no such intermarriage.) And so it says (in Gen. 50:12-13), “So his children did for him just as he had commanded them. And his children brought him up to the land of Canaan.” His children, but not his grandchildren (who were forbidden to touch the bier)! How did he charge them? He said to them, “Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun shall carry my bier on the East; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, on the South; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, on the West; Dan, Asher, and Naphtali, on the North. Joseph is not to carry [at all], because he is a king; and you must impart honor to him. Nor is Levi to carry. Why? Because he will carry the ark (aron), and whoever carries the ark of the One who lives forever is not to carry a coffin (aron) of the dead. If you do this and carry my bier, just as I have charged you, the Holy One, blessed be He, is going to have you encamp by the various standards.” When he passed away, they carried him just as he had charged them. It is so stated (in Gen. 50:12), “So his children did for him just as he had commanded them.” What is written next (in vs. 13)? “And his children brought him up to the land of Canaan.” When Israel went forth from Egypt, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Now is the time for them to make standards, just as their father had proclaimed to them that they were going to make standards.” Immediately the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, “Make those standards for my name.” Immediately Moses began to be concerned. He said, “There is going to be dissension among the tribes. If I tell the tribe of Judah to encamp in the East, they will say, ‘It is impossible for us to encamp anywhere but in the South.’ And so each and every tribe [would act] like that one.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “What concern is that to you? They do not need you in this matter. They will recognize their dwellings by themselves. Why? Because their father's will was in their hand on how to encamp by the standards. I am not establishing something new. They already have their father's arrangements (Gk.: taxeis.) in their hands. Just as they have taken positions around his bier, so let them take positions around the tabernacle.” Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Numb. 2:2), “Each with his standard, under the banners [for their fathers' house].” How were they encamped? The Levites camped around the tabernacle of witness, with Moses, Aaron, and his children on the East. (See Numb. R. 2:10.) It is so stated (in Numb. 3:38), “Those who camped before the tabernacle, in front before the tent of meeting to the East, were Moses, Aaron, and his children.” And adjacent to them were Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun. Hence they said, “Fortunate is the righteous person and fortunate are his neighbors.” (Suk. 56b. See below, Numb. 5:8.) This refers to the three tribes (rt.: shbt) which were adjacent to Moses and Aaron. (Gen. R. 3:13; Numb. R. 3:12.) They became great in the Torah, as stated (in Gen. 49:10), “The scepter (shbt) shall not depart from Judah, nor the inscriber from between his feet.” In the case of Issachar it is written, (in I Chron. 12:33), “And from the Children of Issachar, those who had an understanding of the times, (The midrash regards UNDERSTANDING as synonymous with Torah.) to know what Israel should do; their heads numbered two hundred and all their kindred under their command ('al pihem),” because they harmonize law (halakhah) at their command ('al pihem). [Of Zebulun it is written] (in Jud. 5:14), “and from Zebulun those who wield the scribal pen.” Because they were neighbors [of Torah, embodied by Moses] they all became children of Torah (i.e., Torah scholars). Now on the South were the Children of Kohath (ben Levi), and adjacent to them were Reuben, Simeon, and Gad. Hence they say, “Woe to the wicked person; and woe to his neighbor.” (Suk. 56b; Numb. R. 18:5; ARN, A, 9:1; see Avot 1:7.) These are the three tribes which were neighbors of Korah (the grandson of Kohath) and his community in the South. These were destroyed with him in his dissension (as stated in Numb. 16:32), “And the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them, their households, every person that belonged to Korah, and their property.” On the West were the Children of Gershom (i.e., Gershon ben Levi), with Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin being adjacent to them. And on the North were the Children of Merari (ben Levi), with Dan, Naphtali, and Asher being adjacent to them. Seven clouds of glory were surrounding them, and this was their [method] of travel: There was a sign (Gk.: semeion.) for Moses in the cloud when it departed. When it departed, he would say (in Numb. 10:35), “Rise up, O Lord, and may Your enemies be scattered.” Then the cloud would depart. When the cloud departed, they all prepared to travel and put away their implements. Whoever had a domestic beast put them on it; and if [a person] had none, the cloud took the remainder. When they were settled, they blew the trumpets. Then Judah and its standard moved out, first its prince and his tribe after him. (CF. Numb. R. 2:7.) And as signs for each and every prince there was a flag. (Lat. (from the Punic): mappa) And from them the empire learned to make a flag. There was also a color for each and every flag, like the color of the precious stones which were on the heart of Aaron. Each and every tribe had its flag dyed like the color of its stone. Then over them were the clouds. Until they were settled, they blew the trumpets. They traveled, and likewise the clouds [traveled over them]. Moreover, something like a kind of beam came out of the cloud, so that they would know in which direction they would be traveling. So was the journey of each and every standard. [When] they finished going to where it wanted them to camp, [since] that cloud which appeared like a kind of beam had, as it were, been traveling independently, they knew that they would camp in that place. [When] clouds of glory stood still for them, they began putting [things] away in their tents where they were to rest. Then the cloud which was over the tabernacle, moved over the camp of the Levites in the middle of the camps. First it stood still. When it stood still, the Children of Kohath and the Children of Levi set up the tabernacle in the presence of all the camps before they came, as stated (in Numb. 10:21), “And they would set up the tabernacle before they came.” When they had set up the tabernacle, each and every one set up [camp] in his [proper] place. Then the clouds of glory stood over them. This was grandeur in the hands of Moses, for the cloud of the glorious Divine Presence did not come down to the tabernacle, until Moses had said (in Numb. 10:36), “Return, O Lord, to the myriad thousands of Israel.” Then the clouds of glory encompassed them. Moreover, the holy spirit says through Solomon (in Cant. 6:4), “You are as beautiful my darling, as (ke) tirzah.” What is the meaning of “ketirzah (ktrtsh, rt.: rtsh)?” That I am pleasing (mtrtsh, rt.: rtsh) to you. (Numb. R. 2:5.) Another interpretation (of Cant. 6:4), “Ketirzah" (rt.: rtsh) [means] just as you are pleasing (rt.: rtsh) to Me in the sacrifices. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 1:4), “And it shall be pleasing (rt.: rtsh) for Him to atone for him.” (Cant. 6:4, cont.,) “As comely as Jerusalem (yrushlym),” [means] like these ministering angels, in that they feared (rt.: yr') [Me] and were reconciled (rt.: shlm) to Me. (Ibid., cont.,) “Awesome as [hosts] with standards,” like the standards which I gave you. So when David sees [them], he says (in Ps. 147:20), “He has not done so for any nation,” only for it.

But when I sleep with my fathers (Gen. 47:30). Jacob said to Joseph: “If you will do as I have asked, well and good, but if not, my soul shall depart at once.” “I shall do it,” he answered. “Swear unto me,” said Jacob. And he swore unto him. And Israel bowed down before the Shekhinah that hovered over him. What is written after he passed away? His sons did unto him as he commanded them (ibid. 50:12). The Holy One, blessed be He, said: Death does not permit man to rejoice in this world, but in the world-to-come He will swallow up death forever (Isa. 25:8). When He does swallow up death, then I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in My people; and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying (Isa. 65:19).

Another matter: “Behold, I am sending an angel before you” – that is what is written: “And I said: How shall I place you [ashitekh] among the children” (Jeremiah 3:19). What is ashitekh? The Holy One blessed be He said: From the moment that you stood at Sinai and received the Torah, and I wrote that I love you, as it is stated: “But because of the Lord’s love for you” (Deuteronomy 7:8) – after I loved you, how can I hate you? “How shall I place you [ashitekh] among the children?” Ashitekh indicates nothing other than animosity, as it is stated: “I will place [ashit] animosity” (Genesis 3:15). Another matter: “How shall I place you [ashitekh] among the children?” (Jeremiah 3:19) – Rabbi Yehoshua said: You have obligated yourselves, as it is written: “In accordance with all that shall be imposed [yushat] upon him” (Exodus 21:30). Rabbi Berekhya said: You have laid waste to yourselves, as it is written: “Briers and thistles [shayit]” (Isaiah 5:6). “I gave you a desirable [ḥemda] land” – why is it called desirable? Because the Temple is located in it; that is what is written: “The mountain that God desired [ḥamad] for His abode” (Psalms 68:17). Another matter: “A desirable land” (Jeremiah 3:19) – for all the kings desired it, as between Ai and Jericho is only three mil, and this one had a king and that one had a king. Another matter: “A desirable [ḥemda] land” (Jeremiah 3:19) – the Rabbis say: A land that was made desirable for the patriarchs of the world. (God made it desirable to Abraham and Isaac by commanding them to live there and by promising them the land. They fulfilled these commands, thereby indicating how desirable it was to them. ) Abraham, as it is stated: “Go from your land…[to the land that I will show you]” (Genesis 12:1). Isaac – “reside in this land” (Genesis 26:3). Jacob – “you shall transport me from Egypt” (Genesis 47:30). Why did it become desirable for them? (Why was it desirable to them to be in the Land of Israel even after death, as in the case of Jacob? (Etz Yosef).) Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: Because [those who are buried there] come to life first in the messianic era. What is “a magnificent inheritance [naḥalat tzevi]” (Jeremiah 3:19)? Why is it analogized to a gazelle [tzevi]? Just as the gazelle, when a person flays it, its hide cannot contain its flesh, so too, when Israel took possession of it, the Land of Israel could not contain its produce. Another matter: Just as the gazelle is easy to eat, (They do not require raising and herding.) so too, the produce of the Land of Israel is easy to eat. (When the people of Israel are deserving, the land produces great bounty without requiring hard work. ) The Rabbis say: Just as the gazelle, its legs are fleeter than any animal and any beast, so, the Land of Israel is faster to ripen its produce than all the lands. Why to that extent? The Holy One blessed be He said to Israel: ‘So that My name will be uniquely associated with you.’ “I said: You shall call Me my Father, and do not turn back from following Me” (Jeremiah 3:19), but you did not do so, but rather, “indeed, a woman has betrayed her lover” (Jeremiah 3:20). The Rabbis say: It is not written here, “her husband,” but rather, “her lover.” Just as a woman cannot rebel against her husband, but she can reject her lover – why, because there is no marriage contract between them – so the Holy One blessed be He says to Israel: ‘You did not render Me a husband but rather a lover; just as a woman betrays her lover, so “you have betrayed Me, house of Israel”’ (Jeremiah 3:20). Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: If only [they were] like a woman to her lover. For as long as he gives her a wage, she obeys him; if he stops giving her wage, she says to him: ‘Was I not subservient to you only for the wage?’ So, the Holy One blessed be He said to Israel: ‘Have I withheld anything from you such that you have rejected Me?’ That is, “a woman has betrayed her lover.” Another matter: “Behold, I am sending an angel” – the Holy One blessed be He said to Israel: Had you merited, I, Myself, would have become a messenger for you just as I did for you in the wilderness, as it is stated: “The Lord was going before them by day” (Exodus 13:21). Now that you did not merit, I am passing you to a messenger, as it is stated: “Behold, I am sending an angel.”

One who finds a corpse for the first time, i.e., he discovers a single corpse in a place that was not previously established as a cemetery, if the corpse is lying in the usual manner of Jewish burial, he removes it from there and also its surrounding earth. It is assumed that this corpse was buried there alone. There is no concern that this area is a cemetery and therefore the corpse may not be moved, nor does one take into account the possibility that another corpse may be buried in the vicinity. Similarly, if he found two corpses, he removes them and their surrounding earth. In a case where he found three corpses, if there is a space between this corpse and that corpse of four to eight cubits, in a standard design, this is a graveyard. There is a concern that this might be an ancient cemetery. One must therefore examine from that spot outward for twenty cubits. If one finds another corpse at the end of twenty cubits, he examines from that spot outward twenty cubits, as there is a basis for anticipating the matter. It is likely that he has stumbled upon an ancient gravesite. He is not permitted to relocate the corpses, despite the fact that if he had found the single corpse by itself at first he could have removed it and its surrounding earth.

Another principle to be derived from the passage from the Zohar is the importance of clinging to scholars and accompanying them along the way to listen to their words of Torah, for the Shechinah dwells among the upright while they are alive and even after their deaths. Thus we see that in earlier generations people were very concerned about the site in which they would be buried. Yaakov Avinu, for example, instructed, “And I will lie with my father and you shall bury me in their burial place” (Bereishis 47:30). The reason for this is that the souls of the dead hover over their graves and are taught each night esoteric insights from the Heavenly yeshiva. Seifer Chassidim (705) relates an incident involving a certain tzaddik who was buried among the wicked. Every night he would appear to his friends and relations, crying out to them in a tearful voice and begging to be moved from there. He explained that because he was buried among the wicked the Heavenly yeshiva refused to reveal to him any secrets of the Torah. As a result his soul was becoming increasingly desiccated until no moisture remained. He gave his relatives no rest until at last they were forced to exhume him from his grave and bury him elsewhere.

This also explains what Joseph meant when he said: אנכי אעשה כדברך, "I shall do as you have said" (47,30). It should have sufficed for Joseph to say merely אעשה כדברך, without the addition of the word אנכי. With the word אנכי, Joseph alluded to the fact that he in turn would act just like his father and make those responsible swear to take his own remains with them to ארץ ישראל. This also explains Jacob saying: השבעה לי, and Joseph's response being described as: וישבע לו. Jacob said: "Swear to me that you will do for me the very same thing you want to do for yourself."

The entire subject matter under discussion revolves around the spiritual levels of ארץ ישראל and the three levels of היכל השם we have discussed at the outset. This is why, when Jacob noticed that his death was approaching, he called for his son Joseph to instruct him to bury him in ארץ ישראל. When he said: ושכבתי עם אבותי, "I wish to lie with my fathers" (47,30), he intended to answer a question that arises from a statement of our sages in Ketuvot 111, that dying and being buried in ארץ ישראל is not to be compared to merely being buried in ארץ ישראל after one has died outside the Holy Land. The Talmud there describes the scholar Ulla as regularly travelling between Babylonia and the land of Israel though he was resident in the land of Israel. He died while in Babylonia, and Rabbi Eleazar grieved over Ulla's misfortune of having died on unclean soil. When informed that his bier was being transferred to the land of Israel, Rabbi Eleazar stated that this did not make up for Ulla having died in a foreign country. In view of this, Joseph might have questioned the value of transporting the remains of his father to the land of Canaan.

נוטלו ואת תפושתו – it is permissible to remove him from there and to bury him in another place, and he must take from the dirt of the grave with him which is pressed by the body in the grave (and which is considered “the dead man’s property”) which is all the crushed, loose earth that is below him and he digs in virgin ground three fingers as it is written (Genesis 47:30): “[When I lie down with my fathers,] take me up from Egypt and bury me in their burial-place,” for it is not necessary to state “from Egypt,” but rather this is what he said: from the dust of Egypt take my people.”

נוטלו ואת תבוסתו (if one finds in his field a body in the usual position of a buried man, the first time, he may remove it with the ground which it occupies – for burial in another place) – it is permissible to remove him from there and to bury him in another place. And he must take from the dust of the grave with him, the ground which is pressed by the body in the grave (and which is considered the dead man’s property), which is all the crushed, loose earth that is underneath him, and he digs in virgin earth three fingerbreadths as it is written (Genesis 47:30): “[When I lie down with my fathers,] take me up from Egypt and bury me in their burial-place,” for he didn’t need to say, “from Egypt”, but rather, this is what he said: “from the dust of Egypt take with me.” But Maimonides had the reading "תבוסתו"/his ground that is pressed by a body in a grave (as opposed to the reading in the Mishnah"תבוסתן"/their ground that is pressed by a body in a grave, the dust that is mixed from blood and the moisture/secretion of the corpse. It is the language of (Ezekiel 16:6): “[When I passed by you] and saw your wallowing in your blood, [I said to you: ‘live in spite of your blood.’].”

ויאמר יוסף אל אחיו....וישבע יוסף, “Joseph spoke to his brothers and he made them swear an oath;” It is difficult to understand why Joseph repeated the words פקוד יפקוד. We would have expected him to say: “when G–d will remember you and take you out of Egypt, take my remains with you.” This would have been parallel to Yaakov’s last request from his son Joseph.” (Compare Genesis 47,30) We may be correct in assuming that the first time he used the expression פקוד יפקוד, this was meant as a reference to how Yaakov his father had introduced a similar request.

A Midrashic approach based on Tanchuma Vayechi 1: the words “the days of Yisrael’s death were approaching” reflect what we have read in Chronicles I 29,15: “for we are sojourners with You, mere transients like our fathers; our days on earth are like a shadow, with nothing in prospect.” If at least the shadow would be that of a wall or a tree, i.e. an enduring shadow; but our days are only like the passing shadow of a bird which flies over us. This is what the psalmist had in mind when he wrote concerning man (Psalms 144,4): “Man is like a breath; his days like that of a passing shadow.” As soon as the bird flies over, his shadow departs with it. When David said in Chronicles that “there is no prospect,” he meant that there is no prospect of escaping physical death. Everybody knew and verbalised the fact that he would die. Avraham phrased it by saying (Genesis 15,2) “I am going to die without a child.” [Had he not known that he would die, having no child to replace him would not have bothered him. Ed.] Yitzchak had called in his son Esau in order to bless him “before I die” (Genesis 27,4). Yaakov referred to his impending death by saying “I want to be buried with my fathers” (Genesis 47,30). Seeing that he said these words close to his death, it is clear he spoke about the need to die, i.e. “when the days of Yisrael to die drew near.” When Yaakov was close to death he began to belittle himself in the presence of Joseph by saying: “if I please find favour in your eyes.” You find a similar phenomenon happening with David where the prophet describes the last days of his life as “the days for David to die drew near,” whereas nowhere else did the prophet refer to him as merely David instead of as “King David.” All of this proves that on or about the time of a man’s death he loses whatever control he used to possess over his spirit as mentioned in Kohelet 8,8: “No man has authority over the lifebreath- to hold back the lifebreath;” there is no authority over the day of death.”

SWEAR UNTO ME. AND HE SWORE UNTO HIM. Jacob did not suspect that his righteous and beloved son would disobey his father’s command and renege on the matter which he had promised him by saying, I will do according to thy words. (Verse 30 here.) But Jacob did so in order to strengthen the matter in the eyes of Pharaoh, as perhaps he might not give Joseph permission to leave him, and he would instead say to him, “Send your brothers and your servants, and they will bring him up there.” It may be that Pharaoh would want the prophet (Jacob. — Rashi quotes Hilchoth Gedoloth in Megillah 14 a that Jacob was one of the forty-eight prophets that arose in Israel.) to be buried in his country as an honor and privilege to them. It was for this reason that he made him swear for it would not then be proper for him to force Joseph to violate his oath, and Joseph too would feel more obligated to fulfill his father’s wish on account of the oath. Such indeed was the case, as Pharaoh said, Go up, and bury thy father, as he made you swear. (50:6.)

BURY ME ‘EL AVOTHAI.’ With my fathers. This is the language of Rashi. However, Rashi did not explain the expression el hame’arah as meaning ‘with’ the cave. (Ramban’s intent is to point out that the word el in the second expression could not mean “with,” which confronts us with the difficulty of having the same word assume different meanings in the same verse. Ramban will suggest various ways of resolving this difficulty.) It is possible that the expression of this verse is concise [and should be understood as if it said], “Bury me and carry me to my fathers to the cave,” for so Jacob said, And thou shalt carry me out from Egypt, (Above, 47:30.) and it further says, And his sons carried him. (50:13.) It is possible that the word el serves here to indicate many meanings: (Since Ramban cites Scriptural references to justify each usage, he finds no difficulty in the fact that the word is used differently in the same verse.) Bury me ‘with’ my fathers, just as in the verse, And thou shalt not take a woman ‘el’ her sister, (Leviticus 18:18.) meaning “with her sister.” El hame’arah means “in the cave,” just as in the verses: ‘Ve’el’ (And in) the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee; (Exodus 25:21.) Behold, he hath hidden himself ‘el’ (among) the baggage. (I Samuel 10:22.) Of similar usage is the expression, And after this, Abraham buried Sarah his wife ‘el’ (in) the cave. (Above, 23:19.) Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that the meaning of the expression, Bury me (Kivru (bury me) is in the plural form.) with my fathers, is that the brothers should go with Joseph. Now Jacob really did not need to do that. However, he now commanded all of them to bury him in the cave, just as he had sworn Joseph, because he feared that Pharaoh might not give Joseph permission to leave the land lest he remain in his land [Canaan]. (Abarbanel comments that the reason Pharaoh sent a group of Egyptians to accompany the burial party was that he feared lest Joseph and his brothers be influenced by the attachment to Canaan demonstrated by their father in both life and death and decide to stay there.) Do you not see that it was necessary for Joseph to plead with the house of Pharaoh (Further, 50:4-5.) that they should request Pharaoh to let him go, and he answered, Go up, and bury thy father, as he made thee swear, (Ibid., Verse 6.) as he agreed to it only on account of the oath!

It is written (Gen. 47:30): “You shall carry me from Egypt and bury me in their burial place.” What would Jacob lose at any place he would prophesy? Rebbi Eleazar gave an inner reason, Rebbi Joshua ben Levi gave an inner reason, Rebbi Ḥanina gave an inner reason. What is the inner reason? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, (Ps. 116:9) “I will walk before the Eternal in the Land of Life.” But the lands of life are only Tyre and its surroundings and Caesarea (maritima) and its surroundings; there is cheap (food), there is plenty. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Bar Qappara, the Land whose dead will live again in the days of the Messiah. What is the reason? (Is. 42:9) “He gives soul to the people on it.” That would mean that our teachers in Babylonia would lose out! Rebbi Simai said, the Holy One, praised be He, walks before them and they roll like wine barrels. When they arrive in the Land of Israel their souls are with them. What is the reason? (Ez. 36:24) “I shall bring you to your soil,” (37:14) “give My spirit into you, and you will live.”

(There are many parallel treatments of the topic of this paragraph. Uncharacteristically, the different sources of the Yerushalmi tradition all have their own formulation; they borrow the idea but not the language: Gen.rabba 96(7), Tanḥuma Wayeḥi 3, Tanḥuma Buber Wayeḥi 6, Pesiqta rabbati 1, fol. 2b. Only Ketubot 12:3 (fol. 35b) has the same language as here. Babylonian sources Ketubot 111a, Yoma 71a.) It is written (Gen. 47:30): “You shall carry me from Egypt and bury me in their burial place.” What would Jacob lose at any place he would be? Rebbi Eleazar gave an inner reason, Rebbi Ḥanina gave an inner reason, Rebbi Joshua ben Levi gave an inner reason (Note that the chronological order is inverted. In most other sources, the argument of R. Simeon ben Laqish is attributed to R. Eleazar.) . What is the inner reason? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, (Ps. 116:9) “I will walk before the Eternal in the Land of Life.” But the lands of life are only Tyre and its surroundings and Caesarea (maritima) and its surroundings (These are not part of the Land of Israel, at least not in the geography of the Second Commonwealth. Hence, the verse cannot apply to this world but must apply to the Future World which in the Yerushalmi is identified with the Days of the Messiah.) ; there is cheap (food), there is satiety. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Bar Qappara, the Land whose dead will live again in the days of the Messiah. What is the reason? (Is. 42:9) “He gives soul to the people on it.” That would mean that our teachers in the diaspora would lose out! Rebbi Simai said, the Holy One, praised be He, makes the earth erode before them and they roll like wine barrels (In Gen. rabba: “He makes cavities in which they move”.) . When they arrive at the Land of Israel their souls return to them. What is the reason? (Ez. 37:12) “I shall deposit you on the territory of Israel (In the verse: “I shall bring you to the territory of Israel.” The return of the body precedes the return of life by two verses.) ,” (v. 14) “give My spirit into you, and you will live.”

§ The verse states that Jacob commanded Joseph: “You shall carry me out of Egypt and bury me in their burying-place” (Genesis 47:30). Karna said: There are inner matters here, i.e., a secret meaning: Our Patriarch Jacob knew that he was completely righteous, and if the dead of the lands outside of Eretz Yisrael come alive, why did he trouble his sons to bring him to Eretz Yisrael? The reason is that he was concerned lest he not merit the tunnels.

§ The mishna taught that he removes them and their surrounding earth. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of surrounding earth? Rav Yehuda said: The verse states with regard to Jacob’s instruction to Joseph to transfer his remains to Eretz Yisrael: “You shall carry me out from Egypt” (Genesis 47:30), which indicates: Take some earth out from Egypt with me, i.e., take the earth that is near the corpse.

For I will lie with my fathers. Carry me out of Egypt, and bury me in their grave. He [Yoseif said], I will do as you say.

that I may sleep with my fathers, and thou mayest carry me from Mizraim, and bury me in their sepulchre. But because he was his son he did not (so) put his hand; but said, I will do according to thy word.

According to Jewish mystics, Joseph was the paradigm of virtue and righteousness, the personification of tzaddik yesod olam, a man of such holiness that his merit sustains the entire world. Joseph was also Jacob’s favorite son, and they shared a special relationship. (See Gen. 30:25 and Rashi’s comment on that verse; Gen. 37:2 and the respective Rashi; also Gen. 37:11, 37:35, 45:27-28.) When Jacob lay dying he called Joseph and requested burial in the Land of Israel. Although Joseph promised that he would ensure his father’s interment in Israel (Gen. 47:30), Jacob was not satisfied and demanded that an oath be sworn in God’s name: “And he [Jacob] said ‘Swear to me’ and he [Joseph] swore to him, and Israel [another name for Jacob] bowed back toward the head of the bed” (Gen. 47:31).

The Chidushei Harim explained Yaakov’s request for Yosef to swear to bury him in Eretz Yisrael, stating that Yaakov bowed down to Hashem because his family was complete and Yosef was a king (Rashi on Bereishis 47:31). The swearing, 'shavua,' is connected to 'shiva' (seven), symbolizing the connection of all seven traits (midos) to the life force. This act revealed Yosef’s spiritual aspect to Yaakov. The necessity of the oath was profound. Yosef's ability to resist immorality, crucial for Bnei Yisrael's purity in Mitzrayim, was significant. The Zohar explains that Yaakov's burial in Eretz Yisrael was promised by Hashem, contingent on Yosef's role. By making Yosef swear, Yaakov transferred his spiritual power to him, allowing Yosef to embody Yaakov's vitality even in Mitzrayim. Yaakov's prostration indicated his gratitude, seeing his legacy continue through his sons. The brothers' fear after Yaakov's death arose because they sensed that Yosef now held this inherited spiritual power.

על ראש המטה, Yaakov gave thanks to Hashem Who had made Joseph’s heart decide to bury his father with his forefathers. This is how Joseph’s dream about the sun bowing down to him, was fulfilled, i.e. he had bowed to the Presence of G-d, not to his son. [The “sun” in the dream, had been Yaakov. Ed.]

AND ISRAEL BOWED DOWN. He payed homage to Joseph because he held royal position. However, I believe it means he bowed to God in praise. Our verse is different from the verse which records the bowing of Abraham (Gen. 23:7), for in the latter case it is explicitly stated that Abraham bowed to the children of Heth. (Gen. 23:7 tells us that Abraham bowed before the children of Heth. Some interpret that verse to mean that Abraham bowed before God. I.E. on Gen. 23:6 rejects that interpretation on the grounds that Scripture explicitly states, And Abraham rose up, and bowed down to the people of the land, even to the children of Heth. However, here Scripture does not explicitly state that Jacob bowed down to Joseph. Hence we may interpret that Jacob bowed to God. Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 23:6 and the notes thereto.)

ויאמר השבעה לי, He said: "swear it to me, etc." Jacob felt that he needed to request an oath for the second time, that Joseph's promise was insufficient. He may have meant simply that he wanted Joseph to humour him and to phrase his promise in the form of an oath, or he may have said so without revealing his true motivation at all but making it clear that he had some reason he did not want to reveal. The reason, of course, was to give Joseph ammunition in case someone would try to prevent him from doing what he had promised. Events proved Jacob correct when Pharaoh wanted to prevent Jacob's body being moved out of the country as we have learned from Sotah 34.

Jacob may have intended to emphasise only the word לי, "to me," meaning that Joseph should not make any mental reservations when he made this promise to his father.

השבעה לי, “swear to me!” seeing that Joseph had already agreed to honour his father’s wish in this regard, Yaakov most certainly did not suspect him of reneging on his promise. The purpose of the oath was so that in the event urgent matters of state would claim Joseph’s attention after his father’s death, or in the event that Pharaoh would raise an objection to Yaakov’s remains being taken out of Egypt, Joseph would have something to reinforce his desire to fulfill his father’s last wish. We know that Yaakov was very astute in the matter as in fact Joseph did have to tell Pharaoh that he had had to promise his father on oath that he would not allow him to be buried in Egypt (50,4). According to Nachmanides Pharaoh then instructed Joseph to go to the land of Canaan in order to bury his father there.

וישתחו ישראל, “Israel prostrated himself.” Seeing that Joseph had agreed to honour his father by undertaking to fulfill his wishes, Yaakov in turn prostrated himself before him to show that he respected the position Joseph occupied as effective ruler of the country. This is the view of Megillah 16 quoted by Rashi. Concerning similar situations, our sages are on record as saying: “prostrate yourself (even) before a fox when you see that fortune is smiling upon him.” A different approach quoted in Tanchuma Vayechi 3 holds that Yisrael prostrated himself before G’d and thanked Him for the promise Joseph had made him. The reason the Torah defines the exact location where Yisrael prostrated himself-toward the head of the bed- teaches us that G’d’s Presence takes up its position at the head of the bed of a sick person. Regardless of before whom Yisrael prostrated himself, the interesting thing is the mention of the word מטה, “bed,” in our verse. This is to teach us that whereas the “bed” of Avraham and Yitzchak were not “complete,” (i.e. neither Avraham nor Yitzchak had succeeded in raising all their children true to their beliefs) Yisrael was the first of the patriarchs who had succeeded in doing this. The Talmud in Pesachim 56 relates the following concern expressed by Yaakov prior to his death when his prophetic powers suddenly failed him: “Maybe G’d forbid one or more of my children is not really loyal to my teachings as happened to Avraham with Ishmael and as happened to Yitzchak with Esau.” His sons reassured him by reciting the words שמע ישראל ה' אלוקינו ה' אחד. Another reason why the word מטה is mentioned here is that the שכינה had come to Egypt with Yaakov. When he is now reported as “gathering in his feet to the bed,” this is a reference of his joining the שכינה which had accompanied him ever since he had gone down to Egypt. The word מטה occurs in that sense also in Song of Songs 3,7 just as the word יאסף appears in Isaiah 58,8 as referring to G’d’s Presence being Israel’s rear guard.

!ויאמר: השבעה לי, normally, unless mentioned to the contrary, an oath is always rendered by using the name of G’d.

וישתחו, he prostrated himself thanking G’d that his son had promised him this favour.

על ראש המטה. The bed on which he had been sitting or lying. He gave thanks to the Lord for having a son who was alive and well after he had for so long given him up as lost, and that this son was even willing to bury him all the way in the land of Canaan so that he could lie with his fathers. The reason why the Torah bothered to tell us, the readers, that Yaakov thanked the Lord “at the head of the bed,” is to tell us that he turned to the “head,” in honour of G’d Who is presumed to watch over the sick at that point. Our sages (quoted by Rashi) use this incident to teach us that the presence of G’d is located at the top of one’s bed. [for those of us worthy of the presence of the Shechinah. Ed.]

SWEAR UNTO ME. AND HE SWORE UNTO HIM. Jacob did not suspect that his righteous and beloved son would disobey his father’s command and renege on the matter which he had promised him by saying, I will do according to thy words. (Verse 30 here.) But Jacob did so in order to strengthen the matter in the eyes of Pharaoh, as perhaps he might not give Joseph permission to leave him, and he would instead say to him, “Send your brothers and your servants, and they will bring him up there.” It may be that Pharaoh would want the prophet (Jacob. — Rashi quotes Hilchoth Gedoloth in Megillah 14 a that Jacob was one of the forty-eight prophets that arose in Israel.) to be buried in his country as an honor and privilege to them. It was for this reason that he made him swear for it would not then be proper for him to force Joseph to violate his oath, and Joseph too would feel more obligated to fulfill his father’s wish on account of the oath. Such indeed was the case, as Pharaoh said, Go up, and bury thy father, as he made you swear. (50:6.)

"And Israel bowed low": To Joseph, from the place where he was at [the top of] the bed.

וישתחו ישראל AND ISRAEL PROSTRATED HIMSELF — The proverb says: Though the lion is king “when the fox has his time, bow to him” (Megillah 16b).

על ראש המטה UPON THE BED’S HEAD — He turned towards the Divine Presence (the Shechinah) (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 3). They (the Rabbis) inferred from this that the Shechinah is above the pillow of a sick person (Shabbat 12b). Another interpretation of על ראש המטה He bowed himself in thanks FOR HIM WHO WAS THE CHIEF (ראש) OF HIS CHILDREN — in thanks because his children were heart-whole with God, and none of them was wicked, for even Joseph who was a king and moreover had been a captive amongst heathen peoples yet maintained his righteousness (Sifré ואתחנן 31).

וישתחו ישראל על ראש המטה. Wie sich Elieser vor Gott hinwarf, als er seine Sendung erreicht hatte, so hier Jakob. Er hatte damit das Letzte erreicht, was er auf Erden zu versorgen hatte. Das Kopfende des Bettes war ihm im Rücken. Naturgemäß saß er mit dem Angesicht zum Fußende gerichtet und Josef vor ihm. Ein Beugen auf das Kopfende hin ist somit ein Zurückbeugen. Es war ein hingebender Dank an Den, der ihn durch seine ganze Vergangenheit hindurch zu diesem Ziele geleitet Gott hatte ihn hierher seinem Sohne zugeführt.

השבעה לי!. This was only a device to enable Joseph to overcome objections by the Egyptians if they would not permit transfer of Yaakov’s remains to another country.

וישתחו ישראל, to give thanks to His Creator for enabling him to exact this promise from his son.. We find that Eliezer, after hearing that Rivkah’s family agreed that he take Rivkah as a wife for Yitzchok, reacted in the very same fashion in 24,52 וישתחו ארצה לה', “he prostrated himself on the earth to G’d.”

When it is the time of the fox, bow to him. I found it written that for one month in the year the fox is king of the animals. About that month it was said, “When it is the time of the fox.” (Kitzur Mizrachi)

He turned toward the Divine Presence... You might ask: Did not Rashi just say, “When it is the time of the fox, bow to him,” implying that he bowed to Yoseif? The answer is: If he bowed only for Yoseif, why was it specifically, “At the head of the bed”? And if he bowed only for the Shechinah, Scripture should have written, “Yisrael prostrated himself to Hashem,” or, “...to Elokim.” Perforce, he bowed on account of both of them, the Divine Presence and Yoseif.

It is from here that they derived that the Shechinah is above the headrest of a sick person... Although Yaakov was not sick [then], he had weakened and was as if sick. Otherwise, why did he request [regarding] his burial place?

For his bed was perfect and none of the offspring was wicked... We cannot say that [the bowing was] only to the Shechinah, because then it should say, “To the head of the bed.” Perforce, he bowed also to Yoseif. But it is a forced explanation of the verse to say that he bowed to Yoseif, yet turned toward the Divine Presence. Therefore Rashi brings “another interpretation... for his bed was perfect...” But this cannot be the only explanation, because if so, why does it say, “At the head of”? [It should just say, “At the bed].” Therefore, Rashi brings the first explanations [as well]. (Maharshal)

He, Jacob, said: Take an oath to me, as a declaration of intent alone is insufficient. And he, Joseph, took an oath to him. Israel prostrated himself as a sign of gratitude at the head of the bed. He did not prostrate himself on the ground, in the customary manner, as he was ill and confined to bed.

וישתחו ישראל על ראש המטה, “Israel prostrated himself at the head of the bed.” According to Rashi the Presence of G’d usually positioned itself near the head of the bed of the sick person. This is difficult according to the view we quoted earlier, that at this point Yaakov was not yet sick, so that we would have to say that at this point Yaakov was sitting on his bed and he prostrated himself as a mark of gratitude to Joseph for having agreed to honour his wish. His gratitude was expressed to G’d Who had given him a son who, in spite of his elevated position, honoured his father’s every wish. It is also possible that he literally prostrated himself before Joseph, thus fulfilling the last detail in Joseph’s dream about the sheaves.

“Israel bowed at the head of the bed” [47:31]. Jacob bowed to Joseph for the good news. At the same time, he was also bowing to the head of the bed since the Shekhinah is at the head of the bed of a sick person. Another explanation is that he bowed in the direction of the bed. That is to say, his bed was kosher; only righteous people came from his bed, even Joseph who was captured by gentiles, remained a pious Jew. (Rashi, Genesis, 47:31.) Here the dream was fulfilled that the sun, which was Jacob, bowed to Joseph. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 47:31.)

“He swore to him” [47:31]. Joseph had to swear to Jacob that he would keep this. Ramban writes here. Did Jacob believe that he would not keep what he promised without an oath? The explanation is that he made him swear in the expectation that Pharaoh would not be able to break his vow. Pharaoh would want to keep Jacob and bury him in Egypt, so that his merit would protect them. (Ramban, Genesis, 47:31.) Ibn Shuaib writes. The whole time that Jacob was in Egypt, seventeen years, no woman miscarried her child, and no person had a toothache. The woman carried her child to term, and all of this was the result of Jacob’s merit. That is why Jacob made Joseph swear that he would take him to be buried in the land of Canaan, Pharaoh would not break his oath. (Ibn Shuaib, Derashot, I:99.) Ibn Shuaib writes that that the word Vayehi has the numerical value of thirtyfour. That is to say, the most important part of his life was thirty-four years, the first seventeen years when Joseph was with Jacob, his father, and now again seventeen years in Egypt. This was his proper life. However, the other years were no life. (Ibid., I:98.) Bahya writes. Jacob was afraid that they would make an idol out of him. If he became an idol, God repays and punishes all those who worship idols, and He particularly punishes the idols. Jacob also said that the earth of the land of Israel atones for our sins, since the verse said, “it shall be inhabited by folk whose sin has been forgiven” [Isaiah 33:24]. That is to say, the people that dwell in the land of Israel, their sins are forgiven. The gate of prayer to Heaven is also is also there and from there the soul goes straight to heaven. (Bahya, Genesis, 47:29.) Jacob said, “when I lie down with my fathers” [47:30]. I will come to my ancestors. Rabbi Isaac said about this. From here we learn that the person knows well on the day when he will die, where he will come, to the righteous or to the evildoers. Therefore, the verse said first, I would come to my ancestors. Afterwards, the verse says, you must take me to the land of Israel. That is to say, Jacob said: my soul is coming soon to my ancestors. When a person dies, even at sea or in the wilderness, or on dry land, it soon comes to its ancestors. Jacob said: you should bury me in the grave where my ancestors are. From here we learn that a righteous person should be buried near another righteous person and an evildoer near another evildoer. (Bahya, Genesis, 47:30.)

And because of this: Open for me... – on the first day, for the letter Yod (י) , which is the vowel-point of the qametz (ָ) , my sister... – on the second day, my beloved (ra’ayah) ... – on the third day, which is the Faithful ‘Shepherd’ (ra’aya) , my dove... – on the fourth day, my perfect one (tam) ... – on the fifth day. (Lam. 4:22) Completed (tam) is your iniquity, O daughter of Zion... for my head... (Song. 5:2) – on the sixth day, for it is stated: (Gen. 47:31) ... and Israel bowed at the head of the bed – which is the sixth day. ... filled with dew (Song. 5:2) – on the seventh day. This is surely the drop Yod (י) , and this is the dagesh point of the letter Beiyt (ב) .

and may my bed be perfect before You. (The word “bed” is used here figuratively for one’s future generations. See Rashi to Genesis 47:31; It was said of our forefather Jacob that “his bed was perfect”: indicating that all his offspring were pure and steadfast.—Iyun T’filoh)

Blessed are You, Adonoy, our God, King of the Universe, Who causes the fetters of sleep to fall upon my eyes, and slumber upon my eyelids. May it be Your will, Adonoy, my God and God of my fathers to make me lie down in peace, and to raise me (again) to peace. Let my thoughts not terrify me— nor evil dreams or evil fancies (disturb me), and may my bed be perfect before You. (The word “bed” is used here figuratively for one’s future generations. See Rashi to Genesis 47:31; It was said of our forefather Jacob that “his bed was perfect: indicating that all his offspring were pure and steadfast.—Iyun T’filoh) And light up my eyes lest I sleep the sleep of death, for You illuminate the pupil of the eye. Blessed are You, Adonoy, Who illuminates the whole world with His glory.

Blessed are You, Adonoy, our God, King of the Universe, Who causes the fetters of sleep to fall upon my eyes, and slumber upon my eyelids. And illuminates the pupil of the eye. May it be Your will, Adonoy, my God and God of my fathers to make me lie down in peace, and to raise me (again) to good life and peace, and grant me my portion in Your Torah, make us accustomed to do Your commands, and let us not become accustomed to sin, Do not bring us into the grasp of sin, Do not cause us to be tested, or brought to disgrace. May I be ruled by the Good Inclination and let me not be ruled over by the Evil Inclination. Protect me from Satan, from an evil mishap and from illnesses. Let my thoughts not terrify me— nor evil dreams or evil fancies (disturb me), and may my bed be perfect before You. (The word “bed” is used here figuratively for one’s future generations. See Rashi to Genesis 47:31; It was said of our forefather Jacob that “his bed was perfect: indicating that all his offspring were pure and steadfast.—Iyun T’filoh) And light up my eyes lest I sleep the sleep of death, Blessed are You, Adonoy, Who illuminates the whole world with His glory.

and may my bed be perfect before You. (The word “bed” is used here figuratively for one’s future generations. See Rashi to Genesis 47:31; It was said of our forefather Jacob that “his bed was perfect: indicating that all his offspring were pure and steadfast.—Iyun T’filoh)

[2] Another explanation: "I will make my opinions widely known." This is Jacob, when he went down to Egypt, he declared the power of the Almighty, as it is written "And he blessed Joseph and said, 'The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God who has been my shepherd all my life to this day'" (Genesis 48:15). He said to them, "May it be the will [of God] that you go in the ways of Abraham and Isaac." They gathered and listened (Genesis 49:1). And why did he call them? Rather he said, "Abraham, my grandfather, had two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. Ishmael was wicked, Isaac was righteous. Similarly, Isaac had two sons, Esau and I. Esau despised the ways of God, and I loved His ways. And God gave me twelve sons. You may say that half of them are righteous and half are wicked." They said to him, "We know what is in your heart." He immediately prostrated himself, as it is written "And Israel bowed in worship" (Genesis 47:31), and began saying "Blessed be the Name of His glorious kingdom forever and ever." Rabbi Chanina said, "Why did he prostrate himself? So that no impure matter should leave his body. At that moment, it was fulfilled 'God has made Himself known in Judah, His name is great in Israel;'" (Psalm 76:2).

Another matter, “The Lord supports all those who fall” (Psalms 145:14) – these are the barren women, who fall inside their houses. “And He straightens all who are hunched” (Psalms 145:14) – when the Holy One blessed be He remembers them with children, they stand erect. Know that it is so, as Leah was the unloved one of the household, but when the Holy One blessed be He remembered her, she stood erect. That is what is written: “The Lord saw that Leah was unloved.” “That Leah was unloved [senua]” – she performed the action of the hated [hasenuim], (Sinners, who spend their time praying for repentance.) as she would say that she would marry the enemy [lasoneh],” (Esau.) . These were the stipulations: The elder to the elder, and the younger to the younger. She would weep and say: ‘May it be His will that I will not fall in the portion of that wicked man.’ Rav Huna said: Prayer is powerful, as it nullified the decree. Moreover, she preceded her sister. Everyone would mock her – seafarers would mock her, wayfarers would mock her, even those sitting in the pits behind the loom would mock her. They said: ‘This Leah, her inside is not like her outside; she appears like a righteous woman, but she is not a righteous woman. Were she a righteous woman, she would not have deceived her sister.’ Rabbi Ḥanin said in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Rabbi Yitzḥak: When Jacob our patriarch saw the actions that Leah deceived her sister, he set his mind to divorce her. When the Holy One blessed be He remembered her with children, he said: ‘Am I divorcing the mother of these?’ Ultimately, he gave thanks for this matter. That is what is written: “Israel prostrated himself at the top of the bed [al rosh hamita]” (Genesis 47:31). Who is the rosh mitato (The mother of the majority of his children.) of our patriarch Jacob? Is it not Leah? “And Rachel was barren [akara]” – Rachel was the primary of the household, just as it says: “Rachel was akara” – the primary [ikara] was Rachel. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Most of the participants in the feast (The reference is to the wedding feast of Boaz and Ruth.) were primarily from Leah; that is why Rachel is rendered primary (“May the Lord grant that the woman who is coming into your house will be like Rachel and like Leah” (Ruth 4:11).) – Rachel was barren [akara]” – Rachel was the primary of the household. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai taught: Because all the matters are dependent on Rachel, that is why Israel is called by her name: “Rachel weeps for her children” (Jeremiah 31:15). Not only is it by her name, but also by her son’s name: “Perhaps the Lord, God of hosts, will be gracious to the remnant of Joseph” (Amos 5:15). And not only by her son’s name, but by the name of her grandson, as it is stated: “Is Ephraim a dear son to me?” (Jeremiah 31:20).

[(Gen. 49:1:) THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS.] This text is related (to Job 12:20): HE DEPRIVES THE TRUSTWORTHY OF SPEECH AND TAKES AWAY THE REASON OF ELDERS. (Tanh., Gen. 12:8; Gen. R. 96, New Version, on Gen. 49:1 (= pp. 1276—1277 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); also Gen. R. 99 (another version):5 (= pp. 1200—1202 in the Theodor-Albeck edition).) This refers to Isaac and Jacob, in that both of them wanted to reveal a mysterion (The Greek word means “secret thing” or “mystery.”) of the Holy One (i.e., his secret). Isaac called for Esau. He wanted to reveal the end to him, but the Holy One concealed it from him, as stated (in Gen. 27:1): HE CALLED FOR HIS ELDER SON, ESAU; < AND HE SAID UNTO HIM: MY SON; AND HE SAID: HERE AM I >…. (Since both patriarchs used the same verb (CALLED) when death was near, the midrash assumes that the purpose for the calling is the same here as in Gen. 49:1. Isaac, however, got no further in his revelation than MY SON.) Jacob also wanted to reveal the end to his sons, (See above, 12:1; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 49:1.) as stated (in Gen. 49:1): < THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS AND SAID >: GATHER TOGETHER AND LET ME TELL YOU < WHAT SHALL HAPPEN TO YOU IN THE LATTER DAYS >. To what is the matter comparable? To a slave whom the king trusted with everything that he had. (PR 21:13.) When that slave came to die, he called for his sons in order to make them free and tell them where their manumission document (Gk.: diatheke (“testament”).) was. The king stood over him. When he saw him standing < there >, he discarded the thing which he had wanted to reveal to them. He began saying to them: Will you slaves of the king please honor him in the same way that I have honored him all my life? Similarly (according Gen. 49:1), Jacob called for his sons to inform them when the end would be. Immediately the Holy One was revealed over him. He said to him: You called for your sons but did not call for me. < It is so stated > (in Is. 43:22): BUT YOU HAVE NOT CALLED ME, O JACOB. When he saw the Holy One revealed over him, he immediately began saying to them: Will you please honor the Holy One just as my ancestors have honored him. It is so stated (in Gen. 48:15): THE GOD BEFORE WHOM MY ANCESTORS < ABRAHAM AND ISAAC > WALKED…. They said to him (the Shema' of Deut. 6:4): HEAR, O ISRAEL, THE LORD IS OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE. (Deut. R. 2:6; cf. Sifre to Deut. 6:4 (31).) Immediately (according to Gen. 47:31): ISRAEL BOWED DOWN UPON THE HEAD OF THE BED. He began to say in a whisper: Blessed be the name of his glorious kingdom forever and ever. (These words follow the first line of the Shema‘ in the liturgy before “And you shall love….” According to yBer. 5:8 (or 9) (14c) (bar.), the words were used after benedictions instead of Amen in the Temple. See also Pes. 56a, where R. Judah maintains that the words used to be omitted.) The Holy One said to him (in Prov. 35:2): IT IS THE GLORY OF GOD TO CONCEAL A MATTER.

This may be compared to a slave to whom a king entrusted all his possessions. When the slave was about to die, he summoned his sons to tell them where the will and writ of manumission were to be found so that they could become free men. The king discovered this and remained at his bedside. When he saw the king, he set aside the thing he wished to reveal to them, and admonished them instead, saying: “You are the king’s slaves, honor him as I have all my life.” Similarly when Jacob summoned his sons to reveal to them what would transpire in the Messianic age, the Holy One, blessed be He, appeared before him and said: You have summoned your sons, but you did not summon Me. And thus Isaiah said: Yet thou hast not called me, O Jacob; neither hast thou wearied thyself about Me, O Israel (Isa. 43:22). When Jacob saw Him, he began to tell his sons: I implore you to honor the Holy One, blessed be He, just as my ancestors honored Him, as is said: The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk (Gen. 48:50). They replied: We know what is in thy heart, and they declared together: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One (Deut. 6:4). Upon hearing this, Israel bowed down upon the bed’s head (Gen. 47:31), and began to say in a whisper: Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom for ever and ever. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: It is the glory of God to conceal a thing; but the glory of kings is to search out the matter (Prov. 25:2). Apparently you do not possess this attribute, For he that goeth about as a talebearer revealeth secrets; but he that is of a faithful spirit concealeth a matter (Prov. 11:13).

Rabbi Eliezer said: In the hour of the death of Jacob he called to his son Joseph, and said to him: O my son! Swear to me by the covenant of circumcision that thou wilt take me up to the burial-place of my fathers in the land of Canaan to the Cave of Machpelah. The ancients used to swear by the covenant of circumcision prior to the giving of the Torah, as it is said, "Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh" (Gen. 47:29), and "he sware unto him" (Gen. 47:31). He kept (the oath) and did (accordingly), as it is said, "And he said, Swear unto me" (ibid.). And all the mighty men of the kingdom went up with him to bury him, and to show loving-kindness to Jacob his father, as it is said, "And Joseph went up to bury his father" (Gen. 50:7). The camp of Israel numbered 5040 (people). All the (people of the) land were bringing food on account of the famine to the camp of Joseph. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: Ye have shown loving-kindness to Jacob, My servant, I also will give you your reward, and also unto your children in this world. When the Egyptians died in the Reed Sea they did not die in the water, but they were deemed worthy to be buried in the earth. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: Ye have submitted yourselves to the divine punishment; I also will give you a place of burial, as it is said, "Thou stretchedst forth thy right hand, the earth swallowed them" (Ex. 15:12).

he came nigh unto Joseph and he forced the door open and he came with his brethren before ‎Joseph. And Judah said unto Joseph: Oh my lord, let thy servant, I pray thee, speak a word in ‎my lord's ear and let not thine anger burn against thy servant: And Joseph said unto him: ‎Speak! And Judah spoke unto Joseph while his brethren stood before them. And Judah said ‎unto Joseph: Be hold when we first came unto my lord to purchase food, thou hast taken us ‎for spies against this land, and we have brought our brother Benjamin into thy presence. And ‎why dost thou further carry on thy mockery with us? And now I pray, may the king hearken ‎unto my words and release our brother that he go home with us to our father lest thou perish ‎this day, and all the inhabitants of Egypt. Knowest thou not what my two brothers, Simeon and ‎Levi, have done unto the city of Shechem and unto the seven cities of the Amorites on ‎account of our sister Dinah and what will they not do on account of their brother Benjamin And ‎I with my strength, greater and more powerful than both of them, will come over thee and all ‎thy land this very day if thou do not willingly release our brother. Hast thou not heard what our ‎God who hath chosen us has done unto Pharaoh on account of our mother Sarah, whom he ‎had taken away from our father? How the Lord hath smitten him and all his household with ‎terrible plagues that even to this day all the Egyptians speak to one another of that great ‎wonder. And even so will our God do unto thee on account of Benjamin whom thou takest ‎from our father this day on account of the evils which thou art bringing over us in thy land this ‎day. For our God will remember his covenant with Abraham our father and he will bring evil ‎upon thee because thou hast grieved the soul of our father this day. And do thou listen, I pray ‎thee, unto my words which I have spoken unto thee this day, and send away our brother that ‎he may go lest thou and all the people of thy lord will die by my sword, for all of you cannot ‎prevail against me.‎ And Joseph answered unto Judah saying: Why dost thou open thy mouth so wide concerning ‎these words, exalting thyself over us, saying that there is great strength within 7 As Pharaoh ‎liveth, if I order my powerful men to fight against you, verily thou and thy brothers here would ‎soon find themselves in the mud. And Judah said unto Joseph: It were better for thee and thy ‎men to fear me. As the Lord liveth, if I once draw my sword I will not return it unto its scabbard ‎until I have slain all Egypt this day, and I will begin with thee and finish up with Pharaoh thy ‎lord. And Joseph answered and said unto him: Verily, not thou alone hast all the strength. I ‎myself am more powerful than thou art, and if thou drawest thy sword I will place it upon ‎thine neck and upon the neck of all those thy brothers. And Judah said unto him: Verily, if I ‎open my mouth against thee this day, I can swallow thee up, and thou wilt be forgotten from ‎the earth and be lost from thy kingdom. And Joseph answered: Verily, if thou openest thy ‎mouth I have power and strength to close it with a big rock until thou canst not utter a word. ‎Behold how many stones there are before us, and can I not take one of them and put it into ‎thy mouth and break thy jaws? And Judah said: God be a witness between us, that I have not ‎sought to war with thee from the beginning even until now, only to give us our brother to go ‎away from thee. And Joseph answered and said: As Pharaoh liveth, if all the kings of Canaan ‎were to come with you, you could not altogether take him from my hands. And now go ye ‎your ways unto your father and your brother shall be a slave unto me for robbing the house of ‎the king. And Judah said: What is it unto thee, oh king, or to thy fame? Verily the king sendeth ‎out of his house in presents or in losses abundance of silver and of gold in all the land, and ‎thou continuest to speak of thy cup which thou sayest he hath stolen from thee, while thou ‎hast placed it into the bag of our brother. Far be it from our brother Benjamin, and from the ‎seed of Abraham, to do such a thing or any other person be he king or prince or an ordinary ‎man. And now refrain thou from saying such a thing, lest thy words be heard in the land and ‎people will say: On account of a little silver the king of Egypt had quarrels and fights with these ‎men, and he hath taken away from them their brother for a slave. And Joseph answered unto ‎them: Take then this cup and go your way from me and leave your brother to be a slave, for it ‎is the judgment of a thief to be a slave. And Judah said unto him: And art thou not ashamed at ‎thy words, that we should leave with thee our brother for this cup? Surely, if thou wouldst ‎give unto us a thousand times as much as thy cup we should not leave our brother even for all ‎the silver of all mankind; verily, we should first die for his sake.‎ And Joseph answered and said: And wherefore have you forsaken your brother and you have ‎sold him for twenty pieces of silver even unto this day, and why don’t you do likewise to this ‎your brother? And Judah said: The Lord did witness between me and thee that we have not ‎desired this fight, and now give us our brother that we go away from thee without trouble. ‎And Joseph answered and said: If all the kings of the land were to gather together, they could ‎not deliver your brother from my hand. And Judah said: What shall we say unto our father ‎when he seeth us and behold our brother is not with us, and his soul will grieve over him? And ‎Joseph answered and said: This is what you have to tell unto your father: The rope has ‎followed the bucket. And Judah said: And art thou a king who speaketh such things and give us ‎the wrong judgment? Woe unto the king that is thy like. And Joseph answered and said: There ‎is no wrong judgment in the words I have spoken concerning your brother Joseph, for verily, ‎you all have sold him unto the Midianites for twenty pieces of silver, and you have denied it to ‎your father saying an evil beast hath devoured him, Joseph hath been torn into pieces. And ‎Judah said: Behold the fire of Shechem is burning within my heart. I will burn all thy land with ‎fire. And Joseph answered: Verily, Tamar, thy sister-in-law who killed thy sons, she hath put ‎out the fire of Shechem. And Judah said: If I pluck out one hair from my body, all Egypt will be ‎killed with my blood. And Joseph answered unto him: Verily, such is your manner of doing, the ‎same that you did unto your brother when you sold him, and you dipped his coat into blood ‎and you brought it unto your father, that he should think an evil beast has devoured him, and ‎this is his blood.‎ And when Judah heard these words he was terribly angry and his wrath burned within him. ‎And there was lying before him a stone whose weight was four hundred shekels, and while ‎Judah’s anger was burning he seized the stone with one of his hands and threw it heavenward ‎and he caught it up with his left hand. And after this he placed it under his feet and he sat ‎down upon it with his might and the stone was crumbled to dust by Judah’s strength. And ‎when Joseph saw the action of Judah he was greatly afraid, and Joseph commanded his son ‎Manasseh, and he did unto another stone what Judah had done before. And Judah said unto ‎his brothers let not the man among you think this man is an Egyptian, for being able to do such ‎a thing he must be of the family of our father. And Joseph said: Not upon you alone was ‎strength bestowed, for we also are powerful men, and why will you exalt yourself over all of ‎us? And Judah said unto Joseph: I pray thee release our brother and do not invite ruin upon ‎thy country this day. And Joseph answered unto them saying: Go ye and tell your father that ‎an evil beast hath devoured Benjamin as you have said concerning your brother Joseph. And ‎Judah conferred with Naphtali saying unto him: Go now hastily and bring me the number of all ‎the streets that are in Egypt. And Simeon said unto him: Let not this concern thee, for behold I ‎will ascend the mountain and take one of its large stones and cast it on all the people of Egypt ‎and kill all those that are in it. And Joseph heard all that his brothers had spoken in his ‎presence, for they knew not that Joseph understood them for they thought he understood ‎not the Hebrew tongue. And Joseph, hearing the words of his brethren was in great fear lest ‎they might really destroy all Egypt, and he commanded unto his son Manasseh, saying? Go ‎thou hastily and assemble all the inhabitants of Egypt and all the mighty men, and let them at ‎once appear before me on horses and on foot, with all musical instruments in their hands. And ‎Manasseh went and did so. And Naphtali had gone according to Judah’s order. And Naphtali ‎was nimble footed like a swift stag, so that he could walk upon the ears of corn and they would ‎not bend under him. And he went swiftly and he numbered the streets of Egypt and behold ‎they were twelve, and he returned hastily and told it unto Judah. And Judah said unto his ‎brothers: Put on quickly every one of you his sword and we will come over Egypt and smite ‎them all that there be not left a remnant. And behold, I will destroy with my own strength ‎three of these streets and you destroy each one. While Judah was saying these words behold ‎the inhabitants of Egypt with all their mighty men came against them all with musical ‎instruments and amid loud shouting. And their number was five hundred horsemen and ten ‎thousand footmen and four hundred men that fought only with their hands and strength ‎without swords and spears.‎ And all these powerful men came with great storming and shouting, and they encircled the ‎sons of Jacob and they terrified them, and the earth trembled at that fearful noise. And the ‎sons of Jacob saw these hosts and they were greatly afraid of their lives. And Joseph did that ‎to terrify the sons of Jacob and to pacify them. And when Judah saw that his brothers were ‎afraid he said unto them: What causeth you such fear as long as the mercy of God is upon us. ‎And Judah saw all the people of Egypt around him to terrify them, but Joseph commanded ‎them saying: Touch no one of these men. And Judah drew his sword quickly and screamed a ‎loud and bitter scream. And he smote with his sword, and he jumped all over the ground, ‎continuing to scream at all the people. And the Lord impressed all the mighty men and all the ‎people with great fear of Judah and his brethren, and they all fled at the noise of Judah’s ‎screaming, and terror came over them and they fell one from the other, and great many of ‎them died as they fell. And all of them fled from before Judah and his brethren. And Judah ‎and his brethren pursued them into the house of Pharaoh and they escaped. And Judah ‎returned once more before Joseph and he roared at him like a lion, and he uttered a terrible ‎shout against him, and the shouting was heard at a great distance, even among the inhabitants ‎of Succoth, and all Egypt trembled from the noise of that shouting, and also the walls of Egypt ‎fell from the trembling of the earth. And Pharaoh fell from his throne to the ground and also ‎the pregnant women of Egypt and Goshen miscarried on hearing the noise and trembling, for ‎they were greatly terrified. And Pharaoh sent his servants, saying: What is it that is going on in ‎Egypt to-day? And they came and they informed Pharaoh of what hath happened, and he ‎wondered greatly, and he was exceedingly afraid. And his fright grew upon him, and he sent ‎word unto Joseph, saying: Thou hast brought over me the Hebrews to destroy all the land of ‎Egypt. What dost thou care for that thief whom thou hast taken for thy slave? Let him depart ‎with his brothers lest we perish through the evil they will bring over us, and I, and you, and all ‎Egypt. And if thou art not willing to do this thing and thou de lightest in those Hebrews, then ‎remove from thee all the precious things I gave unto thee and go along with them, for surely ‎they will smite all my people and destroy my whole country, for behold even in Goshen all the ‎women have miscarried for fear of their shouting. See they have done these things simply by ‎their screaming and yelling and what more can they do if they fight with their swords? Surely ‎they will destroy the whole land. And now choose thou between me and the Hebrews, and ‎between my land and the land of the Hebrews.‎ And when they came and spoke unto Joseph all the words of Pharaoh concerning him, he was ‎greatly afraid of the words of Pharaoh. And Judah and his brethren were still standing before ‎Joseph raging terribly, and all the sons of Jacob were screaming at Joseph even like the roaring ‎of the waves of the sea. And Joseph was in great fear of Pharaoh and of his brothers, and he ‎sought an opportunity to make himself known, before they destroyed all the land of Egypt. ‎And Joseph ordered Manasseh, his son, and he went and came near unto Judah, and he ‎placed his hand upon Judah’s shoulder, and Judah’s rage subsided. And Judah said once more ‎unto his brothers: Let no man among you say this is the work of an Egyptian lad, for verily that ‎is like the action of one of my father's house. And when Joseph saw that Judah’s anger was ‎silenced, he approached and spoke unto Judah in gentle words. And Joseph said unto Judah ‎Verily you have spoken the truth, and you have proven your words concerning your great ‎strength, and the Lord who hath pleasure in you may increase your peace. But tell me the ‎truth, why thou art the only one among thy brothers to rage against me, while not one among ‎the others speaketh one word? And Judah answered: Thou must know that I have pledged ‎myself for this boy, saying unto my father: If I bring him not and set him before thee then let ‎me bear the blame through all my days. And therefore have I been the foremost among my ‎brothers after I saw that thou wouldst not suffer him to go with us. And now let me find grace ‎in thine eyes and send our brother to go with us. Behold I will remain in his stead to serve thee ‎in anything thou desirest. And wherever thou shalt send me I will go to serve thee with all my ‎might. If there: be a mighty king who hath rebelled against thee, send me and thou wilt see ‎what I will do unto him and unto his land. And even if he have hosts of horsemen and on foot, ‎and an exceedingly powerful army, I will smite them all, and bring their king's head before ‎thee. Dost thou not know, and hast thou not heard of it, that our father Abraham with his ‎servant Eliezer smote all the kings of Elam and all their hosts in one night that there was not ‎left of them a remnant? And from that day on the strength of our father was given unto us ‎and our seed as an inheritance forever.‎ And Joseph answered and said: Thou art speaking the truth and there is no false hood in thy ‎mouth, for it hath been told unto us that the Hebrews are possessed of great strength, and ‎that the Lord their God hath great pleasure in them, and that no one can stand against them. ‎And on this I will agree to release your brother, if thou wilt agree to bring into my presence his ‎brother the son of his mother of whom ye have said he went away from you into Egypt. And if ‎you bring unto me his brother, I will take him as a substitute for not one among you has ‎pledged himself for him unto your father. And when he shall be brought before me I will send ‎away with you thy brother for whom thou art pledged. And when Joseph spoke these words ‎Judah’s wrath was kindled against him, and his eyes filled with blood for anger, and he said ‎unto his brothers: Behold this man seeketh this day his own destruction and the destruction of ‎all Egypt. And Simeon answered unto Joseph saying: And did we not tell unto thee at the ‎outset that we know not the place whither he went, nor do we know whether he be dead or ‎alive, and wherefore does my lord demand of us such a thing? And when Joseph looked at ‎Judah’s countenance he saw that his wrath began once more to kindle within him. And Joseph ‎said unto his brothers: Verily you have said that your brother was dead or lost, now therefore, ‎if I should call him and he should appear in our presence would you give him unto me as a ‎ransom for his brother? And Joseph called out with a loud voice: Joseph 1 oh, Joseph! come ‎this day into my presence and appear before thy brethren and sit before them, and when ‎Joseph had spoken these words his brothers looked around themselves each one in a ‎different direction to see whither Joseph was to come before them. And when Joseph saw ‎their actions he said unto them: Why do ye look around here and there, I am your brother ‎Joseph whom you have sold into Egypt? Now, therefore, be not grieved nor angry with ‎yourselves that ye sold me hither; for God did send me before you to pre serve life. And his ‎brothers were greatly afraid of him on hearing his words, and Judah especially was exceedingly ‎terrified. And Benjamin, who was in a chamber when he heard the words of Joseph, he ran at ‎Joseph and embraced him, and he fell upon his neck and they wept. And when the brothers of ‎Joseph saw that Benjamin hath fallen upon the neck of his brother and wept with him, they ‎also fell upon Joseph and they embraced him and they wept a great weeping with Joseph. And ‎the fame thereof was heard in Pharaoh's house, saying: Those men are Joseph’s brothers, and ‎it pleased Pharaoh greatly, for he was afraid of them, lest they turn Egypt into ruin. And ‎Pharaoh sent his servant unto Joseph, to wish him joy on account of his brothers. And all the ‎princes of the army and of the hosts that were in Egypt, came to rejoice with Joseph, and all ‎Egypt rejoiced exceedingly about the brothers of Joseph. And Pharaoh sent his servant unto ‎Joseph saying: Tell unto thy brothers and bring down all that they have and let them come ‎unto me and I will allow them to dwell in the best part of Egypt. And they did so.‎ ‎ - And Joseph commanded his steward to bring unto his brothers offerings and gifts and ‎garments. And he brought unto them many regal garments and great many gifts. And Joseph ‎divided it amongst them. And to each of them Joseph gave changes of golden and silver ‎raiments and three hundred pieces of silver. And Joseph commanded them to put on those ‎garments. And he brought them before Pharaoh, and when Pharaoh saw all the brothers of ‎Joseph, all of them powerful men and of comely appearance, he rejoiced exceedingly. And ‎after this they went away from the presence of Pharaoh to go into the land of Canaan, unto ‎their father, and Benjamin their brother with them. And Joseph took eleven chariots of ‎Pharaoh and gave unto them. And Joseph gave unto them likewise his own chariot in which he ‎rode on the day he was made king of Egypt, to bring their father in it unto Egypt. And Joseph ‎sent garments to all the children of his brothers and a hundred pieces of silver to every one of ‎them, and he sent also garments for the wives of his brothers from the garments of the king's ‎wives according to their numbers, and various perfumeries he sent likewise unto them. And ‎he gave to every one of his brothers ten men to go with them into the land of Canaan to ‎attend upon them and their children and all belonging to them in coming into Egypt. And ‎Joseph sent by the hand of his brother Benjamin, ten garments for his ten sons, an additional ‎gift above the gifts sent to the other children of Jacob's sons. And he sent to each of them fifty ‎pieces of silver and ten of Pharaoh’s chariots. And to his father he sent ten asses laden with ‎the good things of Egypt and ten she asses laden with corn and bread and meat for his father, ‎and all those that were with him, for provision on the road. And unto his sister Dinah he sent ‎garments of silver and of gold and frankincense and myrrh and aloes, and all sorts of toilet ‎articles in abundance. And he sent likewise such things to the wives of Benjamin from ‎Pharaoh’s wives. And he gave unto all his brothers and also to their wives, from all sorts of ‎onyx stones and bdellium, rubies and emeralds, and from all luxuries worn by the nobility of ‎the Egyptians. There was nothing left, of all precious things that Joseph did not send unto his ‎father's house. And he sent away his brothers and they went, and his brother Benjamin he ‎sent with them, to go into the land of Canaan. And Joseph went out, to accompany them on ‎the road on to the boundaries of Egypt, and he instructed them concerning his father and his ‎household and their coming down into Egypt. And he said unto them: See that you fall not out ‎by the way, for this thing was from the Lord in order to save the multitude of people from the ‎famine, for five years yet will the famine be in the earth. And he commanded them saying: ‎When you come into the land of Canaan do not bring that matter suddenly upon my father, ‎but act prudently.‎ And when Joseph had finished giving them his orders, he turned: and went back into Egypt, ‎and the sons of Jacob went to the land of Canaan, in joy and happiness to their father. And ‎when they came to the boundaries of the land, they said to one another: What shall we do in ‎bringing this matter before our father? For if we impart it to him suddenly, and tell him all ‎about it, he will be greatly astounded at our words and he will refuse to listen to us. And when ‎they went on until they approached their houses they met Serach coming towards them, and ‎the damsel was exceedingly beautiful and wise, and a skilled player on the harp; and they ‎called her and she came unto them and she kissed them. And they took her and gave her a ‎harp saying unto her: Go, we pray thee, before our father and sit down before him and strike ‎this harp and speak unto him according to these words. And they instructed her concerning ‎what she had to say, and she hastened unto Jacob and she sat down before him. And she sang ‎and she played beautifully upon the harp, and she sang in the sweetness of her voice: Joseph ‎my uncle is alive and he reigneth over all the land of Egypt; he is not dead. And she often ‎repeated these words. And Jacob heard her words and it pleased him greatly, and when he ‎heard her sing it twice and three times, the heart of Jacob was possessed by joy, through the ‎sweet ness of her voice, and the spirit of God came over him, and he knew that all her words ‎were true. And Jacob blessed Serach for singing these words before him, and he said: My ‎daughter, may death never prevail against thee forever, for thou hast revived my spirit, only ‎repeat thou this song once more before me, for thou hast caused me gladness with thy words. ‎And she sang once more the same words and Jacob listened, and he was pleased and he ‎rejoiced, and the spirit of God came over him. And while he was yet speaking with her, his ‎sons came before him with horses and chariots and royal garments and servants running ‎before them. And Jacob arose and went to meet them, and he saw his sons dressed in royal ‎garments and all the good things that Joseph sent unto them. And they said unto him: Be thou ‎informed that our brother Joseph liveth, and that he ruleth over the whole land of Egypt, and ‎it is he who hath spoken unto us all we have told unto thee. And Jacob heard all the words of ‎his sons and his heart fainted, for he believed them not, until he saw all that Joseph had given ‎unto them and all that Joseph had sent along with them, and all the signs he had spoken of ‎unto them. And they unpacked all the things before him, and they displayed all that Joseph ‎had sent, and they gave to every one of them what Joseph had sent him. And Jaco-b knew ‎that they have spoken the truth, and Jacob was greatly rejoiced on account of his son. And he ‎said: It is enough, Joseph, my son, is yet alive. I will go and see him before I die. And his sons ‎told unto him all that had befallen them, and Jacob said: I will go down into Egypt, to see my ‎son and my children. | And Jacob rose up and he put on the garments which Joseph had sent ‎unto him, and he put a turban upon his head which Joseph had sent him after having washed ‎and shaved himself. And all the men of the house of Jacob and their wives dressed ‎themselves with the things that Joseph had sent them. And they rejoiced greatly on account ‎of Joseph that he was still alive and that he was the ruler over Egypt. And all the inhabitants of ‎Canaan heard the news, and they came and rejoiced with Jacob on account of Joseph that he ‎was still alive. And Jacob prepared for them a feast of three days, and all the kings of Canaan, ‎and all the great men of the land ate and drank and made merry in Jacob’s house.‎ And after this Jacob said: I will go down to see my son in Egypt, and then I will return unto the ‎land of Canaan which the Lord hath promised unto Abraham. For I cannot leave my native ‎land. And behold the Lord spoke unto Jacob: Go down into Egypt and dwell there with all thy ‎household. Fear thou not to go down into Egypt, for I will make thee there to a great nation. ‎And Jacob said in his heart: I will go and see my son, whether the fear of his God is still in his ‎heart amongst all the inhabitants of Egypt. And the Lord said unto Jacob: Fear thou not ‎concerning Joseph, for he still continues in his piety to serve me as it will be pleasant in thine ‎eyes. And Jacob rejoiced exceedingly on account of his son. At that time Jacob commanded his ‎sons and his household to go into Egypt, according to the word of the Lord unto him. And ‎Jacob rose up with his sons and all his household, and they went forth from the land of ‎Canaan, from Beersheba, with joy and a cheerful heart they went into the land of Egypt. And ‎when they came near entering the land of Egypt, Jacob sent Judah before him unto Joseph to ‎direct his face towards his location in Egypt. And Judah did according to the words of his father, ‎and he hastened and ran and he came unto Joseph, and they prepared a place in the land of ‎Goshen, for Jacob and all his household, and Judah returned unto his father on the road. And ‎Joseph made ready his chariot and he called all his mighty men and his servants and all the ‎princes of Egypt to go and receive Jacob his father. And Joseph had it proclaimed in Egypt, ‎saying: Whosoever faileth to go and meet Jacob shall be put to death. And in the morning, ‎Joseph went forth with all Egypt, a great and mighty host, all of them dressed in white and ‎purple garments, and with ornaments of gold and silver and their instruments of war with ‎them. And all of them went forth to meet Jacob with all sorts of musical instruments, the ‎drums and fifes, and they scattered myrrh and aloes all along the road. And all of them ‎marched on in that manner, and the earth shook at their voices.‎ And the women of Egypt went up on the roofs and upon the walls to meet Jacob, and they ‎likewise played with drums and with lutes, and thus Joseph and all his people went forth to ‎meet Jacob. And Joseph had upon his head Pharaoh’s royal crown, for Pharaoh had sent it ‎unto him to wear it on the occasion of meeting his father. And when Joseph came near unto ‎his father, within fifty cubits, he stepped down from his chariot and walked towards his father. ‎And all the princes and prominent men of Egypt, when they saw that Joseph went on foot ‎towards his father, they too, dismounted and walked on foot to meet Jacob. And when Jacob ‎and his sons approached Joseph’s camp, and when Jacob beheld the multitude that came to ‎meet him with Joseph his son, it was pleasing in his eyes, and Jacob wondered greatly at the ‎sight. And Jacob said unto Judah: Who is the man whom I see in the Egyptian camp adorned in ‎royal garments with a very red robe around him, and a regal crown upon his head, who hath ‎now stepped down from his chariot to the ground, and who is coming to meet us. Judah ‎answered unto Jacob saying: He is thy son Joseph, the king. And Jacob rejoiced on seeing the ‎glory of his son. And Joseph approached his father and he bowed down before his father, and ‎all the people of his camp with him bowed down before Jacob to the ground. And behold ‎Jacob ran hastily towards his son Joseph, and he fell upon his neck and he kissed him and they ‎wept. And Joseph also embraced his father and he kissed him and they wept. And all the ‎people of Egypt wept with them. And Jacob said unto Joseph: I will gladly die presently after I ‎have seen thy face that thou art still alive and so honored. And all the sons of Jacob and their ‎wives and children and servants and all the house hold of Jacob wept with Joseph, and they ‎kissed him, and they wept with him exceedingly. And after this, Joseph and all his people ‎returned unto Egypt to their places. And Jacob with his sons and his household came with ‎Joseph unto Egypt, and Joseph placed them in the best part of Egypt, in the land of Goshen. ‎And Joseph said unto his father and his brothers: I will go up and inform Pharaoh that my ‎brothers’ and my father's house, and all belonging unto them, and behold they are in the land ‎of Goshen. And Joseph did accordingly, and he took from among his brothers Reuben, and ‎Issachar, and Zebulun, and Benjamin, his brothers, and he presented them before Pharaoh. ‎And Joseph spoke unto Pharaoh saying: My brothers’ and my father's house and all belonging ‎unto them as also their sheep and cattle have come unto me from the land of Canaan to ‎sojourn in Egypt, for the famine was heavy upon them. And Pharaoh said unto Joseph: The ‎best of the land make thy father and brothers to dwell. Do not withhold from them all that is ‎good, and cause them to eat the fat of the land.‎ And Joseph answered saying: Behold I have placed them in the land of Goshen for they are ‎keepers of sheep and therefore let them dwell in Goshen to feed their sheep away from the ‎face of the Egyptians. And Pharaoh said unto Joseph: All that thy brothers will say unto thee, ‎do thou with them. And the sons of Jacob bowed down before Pharaoh and they went away ‎from him in peace. And After this Joseph brought his father into the presence of Pharaoh, and ‎Jacob came, and he bowed down before Pharaoh, and blessed Pharaoh. And then he left. And ‎Jacob with his sons and all his household dwelt in the land of Goshen. And Joseph gave unto ‎Jacob the land of Goshen. And Joseph gave unto Jacob and his household the best things of ‎the land, and they dwelt securely in the land of Goshen, and Jacob and his sons ate at Joseph’s ‎table all the time, except when they ate in their own houses. And all the Egyptians were eating ‎and drinking in the house of Joseph, through all the days of the famine, for they had sold all ‎belonging to them on account of the famine. And Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for ‎Pharaoh, and Joseph supported them with food through all the days of the famine, and ‎Joseph collected all the silver and the gold and the onyx stones and costly garments, all of ‎which they brought unto Joseph from all the parts of the earth when they had no money. And ‎Joseph took all the silver and gold that came into his hands, about seventy-two talents, as also ‎onyx stones and bdellium in great abundance, and Joseph divided it into four parts and he ‎concealed one part in the wilderness by the red sea, and one part by the river Euphrates; and ‎the other two parts he concealed in the wilderness which was opposite to the wilderness of ‎Persia and Media. And Joseph took the gold and silver that still was left and he gave thereof to ‎all his brothers and unto his father's household and their wives, and the remainder he brought ‎into the house of Pharaoh, about twenty talents of gold and silver. And Pharaoh placed it into ‎his treasure.‎ And the days of the famine were over in all the land, and after this they sowed and reaped all ‎over the earth, and they found their yield year after year. They lacked nothing. And Joseph ‎dwelt in Egypt securely, and the whole land was under his counsel, and his father and all his ‎brothers dwelt in the land of Goshen and they obtained possessions in it. And Jacob became ‎very aged and advanced in days and the two sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, dwelt ‎continually in Jacob’s house with the children of the sons of Jacob their brothers, to learn the ‎ways of the Lord and his laws. And Jacob dwelt with his sons in the land of Egypt in the land of ‎Goshen and they gained possessions therein and they were fruitful and they multiplied ‎exceedingly. ‎

And thus is it written (Ibid. 35:22) "And it was, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuven went and lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine, and Israel heard." When Jacob heard this, he shuddered and said: Can it be that there is "base matter" in my sons! — until he was told by the L-rd that Reuven had repented, as it is written (Ibid.) "And the sons of Jacob were twelve" (including Reuven.) We are hereby taught that Reuven afflicted himself all of his days because of that act, until Moses accepted his penitence, viz. (Devarim 33:6) "Reuven shall live (in this world) and he shall not die" (in the world to come).

And thus do we find that before Jacob's passing from the world he called his sons and rebuked them individually and then called all of them as one and said to them: Can it be that there is some reservation in your hearts about Him who spoke and brought the world into being? They answered "Hear, O Israel" (Jacob) — Just as there is no reservation in your heart, so there is none in ours, but (Devarim 6:4) "The L-rd our G-d, the L-rd is One!" — at which he said "Blessed is the Name of the glory of His Kingdom for ever and ever!" And this is the intent of (Bereshith 47:31) "And Israel bowed at the head of the bed." Is this to be taken literally? (Obviously not. The intent is:) He expressed thanks and praise (to the L-rd) that "base matter" had not issued from him (thus, "his bed"). Others say: Reuven repented. The Holy One Blessed be He said to Jacob: This is what you desired all of your days — that your sons "awake and retire" with the recitation of the Shema. This is the intent of (Devarim 6:4) "Hear, O Israel" (Jacob). Variantly: "Hear, O Israel": From here it was ruled that if one recited the Shema but did not make it audible to his ear, he did not fulfill his obligation.

For one who vows that a bed is forbidden to him, it is permitted to lie in a dargash, which is not commonly called a bed; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: A dargash is included in the category of a bed. Everyone agrees that for one who vows that a dargash is forbidden to him, it is permitted to lie in a bed. For one who vows that the city is forbidden to him, it is permitted to enter the Shabbat boundary of that city, the two-thousand-cubit area surrounding the city, and it is prohibited to enter its outskirts, the seventy-cubit area adjacent to the city. However, for one who vows that a house is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to enter only from the doorstop and inward.

The deeper meaning of the word is that it is an instrument ready and willing to be fashioned by G–d. Acceptance of Divine input from the Celestial Regions results in a spiritual awakening in our regions. Our sages who stated that the sacrificial service is something needed in the Celestial Regions meant that the concept of Israel in the Celestial Regions depends on this input from us through our sacrifices for the furtherance of its own perfection. This is the meaning of Psalms 20,3: ישלח עזרך מקדש "May He send you help from the Sanctuary." It is a reference to sanctity in the "higher" regions helping to establish sanctity in our "lower" regions. The meaning of the word מקודש is also that "for the sake of the sanctity which will emanate from our regions G–d sends His help from above." Jacob merited this level of sanctity because he, as the first of the patriarchs, succeeded to sire children all of whom were loyal to G–d and His teachings. As a result he qualified for the name corresponding to all that the name ישראל in the Celestial Regions in connection with מעשה בראשית stands for. This is the mystical dimension of Genesis 47,31: וישתחו ישראל על ראש המטה, "Israel bowed at the head of the bed." This is also the mystical dimension of Midrash Tanchuma Kedoshim 1 אתם מתקדשים בי ואני מתקדש בכם, "You will become sanctified through Me, and I will become sanctified through you." Whichever way you look at this, it all expresses צדקה, "righteousness," as it shows G–d's desire to help those who wish to sanctify themselves.

When the Torah reports Israel as bowing down at the head of the bed, 47,31) ראש המטה), this is a reference to Jacob and his "bed" (children) jointly having completed the בנין, and having thereby acquired a claim to a domain higher than that of בנין itself. If the ultimate that Jacob attained is symbolized by the word Mittah, the ultimate that Moses attained is symbolized by a word composed of the same letters, i.e. Matteh, only the vowels being different. He is described as holding the מטה אלוקים בידו, the staff of G–d in his hand, an allusion to a higher היכל השם. The word is composed of the letters מט,+ the letter "heh". 49 of the 50 gates of בינה were revealed to Moses; the letter ה is an allusion to the first letter ה in the Ineffable Name, a letter representing בינה.

The verse which tells us that Jacob bowed at the head of the bed, is an allusion to the phylacteries of the head; Jacob's extension, Joseph and his brothers, are the allusion to the phylacteries of the hand. When Jacob crossed his hands (48,14) while blessing Joseph's sons, he took a cue from the manner in which we don the phylacteries.

Jacob was the root of all these "crowns." His "crown," that of the "good name," surpasses all the others in value, it is an essential ingredient in making all the other "crowns" truly meaningful. When Jacob was already sick and his son Joseph visited him, Jacob bowed down to his son because he wore the most important "crown" of all, the crown of Torah. (cf. Genesis 47,31 according to Rashi, who stresses Joseph's righteousness under trying circumstances) [Rashi on 48,2, does not specifically refer to a crown of spiritual significance; the impression Rashi gives is that anyone wearing a temporal crown deserves respect. Ed.] Levi wears the crown of the Priesthood, Yehudah that of Royalty. The specific "power" associated with the "crown" of Priesthood is tied to the confines of the Holy Temple. We find that only kings of the Davidic dynasty were allowed to be seated within the confines of the Temple (Yuma 25a). This is due to David being considered a מרכבה carrier of G–d's שכינה. The Temple on earth is, after all, a מרכבה, for its counterpart in Heaven. We have scriptural proof for this in Habakuk 2, 20: וה' בהיכל קדשו, הס מפניו כל הארץ "And G–d resides in His holy Abode; be silent before Him all on the earth!" The sanctuary is the attribute of Royalty as expressed in the name א-ד-נ-י, whose numerical value -65- equals that of the word היכל. It is also the numerical value of the word הס; the sanctuary is perceived as the foundation of the equivalent of earth in the Celestial Regions.

dem ist das Sofa. דרגש, ed. Lowe דרגיש, syr. ܕܰܪܓܽܘܫܬܳܐ, Sofa, Sänfte, Bahre, vgl. Sanh. II, 3; Mikw. IX, 5; Tos. Nid. IX, 16. In dem Targ. Jon. (דרגשא) und im paläst. Targum (דרגושה) wird das bibl.-hebr. מטה Gen. 47, 31, יצוע Gen. 48, 2, מטה כבודה Ez. 23, 41 (דרגישן) mit דרגש übersetzt. Zur Etymologie dieses Wortes weist Brüll in seinen Jahrbüchern IV, S. 118 auf das, was Spiegel, ZDMG 26, 705 zur Erklärung des Wortes Haudarakhta des Avesta bemerkt: „Es muss von darydraj, griech. δϱαττω herkommen und das Zusammengehaltene, Compacte, vielleicht auch das Umzäunte bedeuten.“ Dieser Stamm draj muss demnach frühzeitig in das Syrische eingedrungen sein. Im Armenischen findet sich gleichfalls dieses Wort als darkht = Garten, Paradies, vgl. Spiegel, ibid. und Hübschmann, ZDMG 46, 235, N. 25. — Über דרגש herrscht schon unter den Amoräern eine Meinungsverschiedenheit. Der eine erklärt es Ned. 56a als „ערסא דגדא, Bett des Glückes“, ein reich ausgestattetes Bett, das dem Hausgenius, der Fortuna geweiht war, aber sonst zum Schlafen nicht verwendet wurde. Der andre beschreibt es als ערסא דצלא, ledernes Bett, das nicht so vornehm wie מטה war und zum Ruhen diente. Als Unterschied zwischen מטה und דרגש wird Ned. 56b angegeben, dass „bei מטה die Gurte um die Bettstangen gespannt waren, während bei דרגש auf der Innenseite Löcher waren, durch die die Gurte gezogen waren“; nach einer andren Erklärung „gingen bei דרגש die Gurte nicht durch die Löcher des Holzes, sondern durch eigens dazu angebrachte Schlingen.“ Vgl. Krengel, das Hausgerät in der Mischna, S. 28—30, ausführlich in Kobak, Jeschurun 1872, S. 34ff. Maimon. erklärt דרגש als ein kleines. niedriges Polster, das man vor das grössere, מטה, stellt, also Stufe, Tritt.

Perhaps what G'd had in mind when He told Jacob that He would descend with him to Egypt was that whenever he or the Jewish people would experience problems, G'd would share their suffering (compare Psalms 91,15 "I am with him in distress"). אנכי ארד עמך מצרימה, the word מצרימה, may be derived from the word מצר, "a narrow, confined area." G'd hinted that whenever Jacob (the Jewish people) would find themselves hemmed in, He would share their misery. G'd demonstrated this to Moses when He appeared to him out of the burning bush, certainly not a dwelling fit for G'd. G'd's message was that as long as the Jewish people are in distress in Egypt, He Himself would reside in such locations as the lowly thornbush. The שכינה never descended to the part of Egypt which was full of impurity. There are numerous instances (such as in Megillah 29) where the descent of the שכינה to Egypt is understood to mean that G'd shared the exile experience of the Jewish people with them. When Israel (Jacob) is described as prostrating himself at the head of the bed in Genesis 47,31, Tanchuma understands this as Jacob bowing down to the presence of the שכינה. [Evidently the presence of the שכינה was felt in Egypt then. Ed.] Moreover, Bereshit Rabbah 94,9 understands that the שכינה made up the number 70 in the list of descendants coming down to Egypt with Jacob, seeing that you will find only 69 names listed there. All of this proves that the שכינה did descend to Egypt (though not to areas infested with impurity).

ותשתחוין לאלומתי, “and they bowed down to my sheaf.” The sun, moon and stars which bowed down to Joseph in his next dream were Yaakov, Bilhah, and his brothers. The expression וישתחו ישראל על ראש המטה, “Israel bowed down (to Joseph) at the head of the bed,” in Genesis 47,31 is the fulfillment of this part of Joseph’s dream. The brothers are reported as prostrating themselves before Joseph already in Genesis 42,6.

A Midrashic approach (found in Vayikra Rabbah 36,4): when mentioning the memory of Avraham and Yitzchak the Torah adds the word אף to signify that both these patriarchs had also sired and raised an Ishmael and Esau respectively, thus causing G’d to become angry; in connection with Yaaov that word is missing seeing all his children remained true to their father’s teaching, to Torah-values. The Torah has listed the merits of the patriarchs. How do we know that G’d will also invoke the merits of the four matriarchs? These are alluded to by the extra word את before mention of the word בריתי, “My covenant.” The word את describing the matriarchs is not unique in our verse. We find this word as referring to three of the matriarchs when Yaakov tells his sons that these three matriarchs had been buried either by him or his forefather in the cave of Machpelah (compare Genesis 47,31). This is also confirmed by Sifra Bechukotai 8,8.

She is pure to her who begot her. Yaakov saw that his bed [i.e., progeny] was perfect without any disqualification, and he thanked and praised the Omnipresent, as it is stated, “And Yisroel bowed down at the head of the of the bed.” (Bereishis 47:31. He bowed in gratitude that all his children were righteous. )

The Gemara expresses astonishment at the use of this parable: Are you calling Joseph a fox? What, was he inferior to his brothers such that in relation to them you call him a fox? Rather, if such a statement was stated, it was stated as follows, not in connection with this verse, but rather in connection with a different verse. The verse states: “And Israel bowed himself upon the head of the bed” (Genesis 47:31). With regard to this, Rabbi Binyamin bar Yefet said that Rabbi Elazar said: When the fox is in its hour, bow down to it, as Jacob had to bow down before his son Joseph, who had reached greatness.

He [Yaakov] said, Swear to me, and he swore to him. Yisrael prostrated himself at the head of the bed.

And Israel praised upon the head of the couch.

And he said, Swear tome: and he sware to him. And immediately the Glory of the Shekina of the Lord was revealed to him, and Israel worshipped upon the pillow of the bed.

ויהי אחר הדברים האלה, “it was after these events, etc;” ever since the universe had been created it had never happened that someone after having sneezed recovered from his illness. He would have died immediately, regardless of where he had been when he sneezed. Yaakov asked G-d to change this, so that he would be able to make his last will and testament before dying. G-d answered his prayer. This is the reason why this paragraph commenced with the words: ‘”It was after these words,“ after G-d had consented to give Yaakov enough time to prepare for his departure from earth. Not only this, but all the kings of the earth became very agitated, when they heard that Yaakov had died only after having made all these arrangements about his forthcoming demise. Ever since that time, not only Jews, but believing people everywhere, pronounce a benediction when they hear someone sneeze. G-d had transformed what used to be a signal of death to continued life, (compare Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer, (earliest kabbalistic text) chapter 52.

ויאמר ליוסף, “he said to Joseph;” according to our sages, the subject in this verse was Ephrayim, who informed his father of Yaakov’s illness; (Tanchuma section 6 on this portion) Rabbi Moshe adds that there is an oblique hint of this in the text, seeing that the letters in the word ויאמר and the word אפרים when reading the alphabet backwards, starting with the letter ת, are in the relative same position as when read from the right to left, i.e. the letter ו in the word ויאמר is the sixth letter in the alphabet when read from right to left, whereas the letter פ is in the sixth place when the alphabet is read from left to right commencing with the latter ת. (the other letters are identical) What we learn from this is that whereas Joseph was not a frequent visitor in the province of Goshen where his father resided, his sons spent much more of their time with their grandfather, so that they were aware of any changes in the state of his health. The words ויקרא לבנו ליוסף, “he called for his son, for Joseph,” i.e. sent a messenger to ask for his presence, indicated that he did not want to wait for Joseph’s next visit. I have heard from Rabbi Sh’muel of blessed memory that the reason that Joseph did not frequently visit his father was that he was afraid that Yaakov would ask him how he had come to be in Egypt in the first place, in which case he would have had to tell him that his brothers had sold him, etc., as a result of which his father would have cursed the brothers. This in turn would have spelled the destruction of the civilised world, seeing that when he had cursed Rachel quite unintentionally, Rachel died prematurely as a result, although the teraphim of Lavan had never even been found. We cannot even imagine what the result of Yaakov cursing ten of his twelve sons would have meant.

THAT ONE SAID TO JOSEPH. Someone said to Joseph. (The subject of va-yomer (and he said) is omitted.) Whom she bore to Levi in Egypt (Num. 26:59) is similar. (Scripture similarly omits the subject. The translation of Num. 26:59 is a literal one.)

48.1. שני בניו עמו, את מנשה ואת אפרים, together with his two sons Menashe and Ephrayim. Why did the Torah have to give us the names of Joseph's two sons when we already know their names as well as the fact that he had only two sons? Alternatively, the Torah could have simply written: "Menashe and Ephrayim," and I would have known that these names referred to his two sons? Besides, why did the Torah have to insert the word עמו, with him, in the middle of the verse? Why did the Torah have to use the word את twice in this verse?

Perhaps the Torah describes Joseph's desire that each of his children be the recipients of separate blessings in addition to the blessings that would devolve upon them in their capacity as his children. This is why it says separately: את שני בניו עמו.

Perhaps the Torah wanted to inform us that Joseph's children deserved a blessing on two accounts; a) because of their respective virtues, b) because they were Joseph's children. The words בניו עמו refer to the latter, the words את מנשה ואת אפרים refer to their individual merits. The word עמו is interposed to prevent us from thinking that the Torah only wanted to inform us about the identity of these two sons.

ויאמר, whoever it was who said it. It is reasonable to assume that it was one of the brothers who traveled to the capital to inform Joseph that his father had taken ill.

ויאמר ליוסף, a third person told him. We find similar constructions, the subject not only not being named but not being identified at all, in verse 2 of our chapter, i.e. ויגד. The Torah does not bother to inform us who was the one that conveyed this information.

ויאמר ליוסף literally, HE SAID TO JOSEPH — “he” means one of the messengers: it is an elliptical phrase. Some say, that Ephraim was regularly with Jacob for study and when Jacob became ill in the land of Goshen Ephraim went to his father in Egypt and reported it to him (Tanchuma 1:12:6).

ויקח את שני בניו עמו AND HE TOOK HIS TWO SONS WITH HIM — so that Jacob would bless them before his death.

אחרי leitet stets einen Wendepunkt ein.ח־ חלה, drückt das Gehemmtsein einer Bewegung aus, wie נוע und נוח. So עלה: die selbständige Erhebung, Entwicklung, das Aufsteigen, (die unbelebte Materie sinkt, die belebende Kraft hebt das Belebte empor). Wird dieses Vorwärtsschreiten, eigentlich das Sichaufwärtsbewegen gehemmt, so ist es: חלה, die gehemmte Entwicklung. רפה) רפא) ist das Lösen des die Aufbewegung hemmenden Knotens, die Heilung; daher Genesung. תעלה, die wieder eintretende Aufwärtsentwicklung, das wieder beginnende Aufsteigen.

Oben, wo Jakob von Josef etwas wünscht, lässt er ihn rufen; hier, wo er Josef etwas, und zwar das Höchste, die בכורה erteilen will, lässt er ihm bloß mitteilen: dein Vater ist krank. Er soll als Kind, in dem Gefühle dessen, dem der altbetagte Vater erkrankt ist, von selbst kommen, und bei dieser Gelegenheit gibt er ihm, was er ihm zu erteilen hat. Ein Jakob macht, selbst wenn er das Höchste schenkt, nicht viel Wesen daraus. —

One of the tellers... [Rashi says, “One of the tellers,” to convey that] “said to Yoseif” in fact means “told Yoseif,” for news is “told,” not “said.” Yaakov’s falling sick before he died was something new to the world, since before his time there was no weakness [before death]. And why is it not written, “told Yoseif”? Because the teller was Ephraim, who was frequently with Yaakov so he saw that he was sick, and it was nothing new to him.

Ephraim was frequently with Yaakov for study... We need not ask: How does Rashi know that Ephraim was frequently [with him for study]? For the answer is: It is written (v. 14), “Yisrael stretched out his right hand... he deliberately placed his hands so (שכל את ידיו).” And why does it not say he “switched his hands” (הפך את ידיו)? Because Yaakov was hinting to him that Ephraim was expert in Torah and had greater understanding (שכל) than Menasheh, and for this reason Yaakov deliberately placed (שכל) his hands. And how did Yaakov know this [about Ephraim]? Because Ephraim was frequently with Yaakov for study.

So that Yaakov might bless them. Otherwise, why should it be mentioned?

Before his death. Yoseif knew that Yaakov had weakened, and now they told him that he was sick. Yoseif said to himself: surely, the day of his death has come. Thus he took his sons with him.

It was after these matters that one, an unnamed person, said to Joseph: Behold, your father is ill. In the previous episode, Jacob had sensed that he was going to die soon; at this point, he became very ill. He, Joseph, took his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, with him.

“Some time afterward” [48:1]. Hizkuni writes. From the day that the world was created, no person sneezed, since he did not want to die. He would have died from the sneeze, even in the street or on the road where he was walking. He would have died, until Jacob prayed and said, Lord of the Universe, let me first become sick, so that I will first give a testament to my children. The Holy One listened to his prayer and made him sick. Immediately, all the nations became afraid; they did not know what was wrong. Therefore, we must say a short prayer when a person sneezes. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:1.) Jacob sent Ephraim, who was always at Jacob’s side that Joseph should come, since Jacob was very weak. (Rashi, Genesis, 48:1.) Ibn Shuaib writes. Joseph kept himself separated from Jacob because he did not want to talk too much with him, as he might ask him, how did you come to Egypt? Joseph did not want to tell him. He always told him that he got lost, even though that was a lie. (Ibn Shuaib, Derashot, I: 99.) One is allowed to tell a lie for the sake of peace.

There is some prima facie evidence indicating that lack of respiration and the state of death are, by definition, synonymous. The Sages inform us that the soul departs through the nostrils, thereby causing respiration to cease and death to occur. The Yalkut Shim'oni, Lekh Lekha, no. 77, observes that after sneezing one should give thanks for having been privileged to remain alive. (Cf. R. Baruch ha-Levi Epstein, Torah Temimah, Gen. 7:22.) The Yalkut, noting that the first mention of sickness in Scripture occurs in Genesis 48:1, remarks that prior to the time of Jacob sickness was unknown. It is the view of the Sages that illness became part of man's destiny in answer to Jacob's plea for prior indication of impending death in order that he might make a testament before dying. Before the days of Jacob, according to the Yalkut, an individual simply sneezed and expired without any indication whatsoever that death was about to overtake him. The Yalkut can readily be understood on the basis of the verse "… and He blew into his nostrils the soul of life" (Gen. 2:6). In the narrative concerning the creation of Adam, the soul is described as having entered through the nostrils. According to the Yalkut, the soul departs through the same aperture through which it entered; hence terminal sneezing is associated with the soul's departure from the body. Apparently, then, respiration and life both cease with the departure of the soul.

Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: Abraham demanded aging. He said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, a man and his son enter a place and no one knows which of them to honor. Because you adorn him with aging, a person knows whom to honor.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘As you live, you have demanded a good thing, and it will begin with you.’ From the beginning of the book until that point, aging is not written. When Abraham stood, He granted him aging – “Abraham was old” (Genesis 24:1). Isaac demanded suffering. He said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, a person dies without suffering, the attribute of justice is outstretched against him. When you bring suffering upon him, the attribute of justice is not outstretched against him.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘As you live, you have demanded a good thing, and I will begin with you.’ From the beginning of the book until here, suffering is not written. When Isaac stood, He granted him suffering – “it was when Isaac was old, and [his eyes] dimmed.” Jacob demanded illness. He said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, a person dies without illness and does not settle matters between his children. When he is ill for two or three days, he settles matters between his children.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘As you live, you have demanded a good thing, and it will begin with you’ – “One said to Joseph: Behold, your father is ill” (Genesis 48:1). Rabbi Levi said: Abraham introduced aging, Isaac introduced suffering, Jacob introduced illness, Hezekiah introduced illness that is cured. He said to Him: ‘You would sustain one until the day of his death. (In good health.) But because a person is ill and recovers, is ill and recovers, he repents.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘As you live, you have demanded a good thing.’ That is what is written: “A composition of Hezekiah king of Judah, when he became ill and recovered from his illness” (Isaiah 38:9). Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: From here [we learn], that between illness and illness, there was an illness that was more severe than both of them.

Until the time of Abraham there was no mark of old age, and anyone who wanted to talk to Abraham spoke to Isaac, or vice versa, [since their appearance was the same]. Then Abraham prayed, and the mark of old age was visible, as it is said (Ib. 47) And Abraham was old. Until the time of Jacob there was no sickness [death occurred suddenly]. Then Jacob prayed that sickness should come before death; as it is said (Ib. 48, 1) Behold, thy father is sick. Until the time of the prophet Elisha there was no one who was cured of sickness. But Elisha prayed and was cured; as it is said (II Kings 13) Elisha was sick of the sickness where he had to die, which signifies that previously he was sick and was cured. Our Rabbis were taught: "Three times was Elisha sick; first at the time he discharged Gechazi from his service, secondly when he set the bears on the children, and the third time when he died."

Another interpretation (of Gen. 24:1): NOW ABRAHAM WAS OLD. Three people loudly demanded three things, and from them they had their beginning. (Gen. R. 65:9; 97:1 (Vatican MS); BM 87a; Tanh., Gen. 5:1; PRE 52. See also above, 2:20.) Abraham demanded old age. Abraham said: When a father and his son enter into a city, no one knows which is the older and which is the younger. The Holy One said: You have loudly demanded old age. By your life, I am beginning with you. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 24:1): NOW ABRAHAM WAS OLD. Isaac demanded afflictions. Isaac said to the Holy One: Sovereign of the World, when someone sins, you exact retribution from him all at once. Afflict him little by little, and you are exacting retribution from him. If you had brought afflictions upon the generation of the flood, they would not have rebelled against you. You, however, bestowed prosperity upon them. They therefore rebelled against you. Thus it is stated (in Job 12:6): THE TENTS OF ROBBERS PROSPER, AND THOSE WHO PROVOKE GOD HAVE SECURITY. The Holy One said to him: You have loudly demanded afflictions. By your life, I am beginning with you. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 27:1): AND IT CAME TO PASS THAT ISAAC WAS OLD, [AND HIS EYES WERE TOO DIM TO SEE]. Jacob demanded illness. Jacob said to the Holy One, Sovereign of the World, one dwells in contentment. Then his life departs, and strife comes into the world. For that reason it is required for one to be in the hands of others; or, in the case of others, it is required for them to be in his hand. Now he dies suddenly and strife comes about in the world. Rather let [one] become [ill] for five or six days until he has ordained for his children everything that is necessary. Then let him depart from the world. The Holy One said to him: Jacob, you have demanded illness. By your life, I am beginning with you. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 48:1): AND IT CAME TO PASS AFTER THESE THINGS {THAT IT WAS TOLD} [THAT ONE SAID] TO JOSEPH: BEHOLD, YOUR FATHER IS ILL. Ergo: The three patriarchs established these three things. It is therefore stated (in Gen. 24:1): NOW ABRAHAM WAS OLD.

Abraham was first with aging, (BM 87a; Gen. R. 65:9; 97 (Vatican MS) on Gen. 48:1 (= pp. 1241—1243 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); Tanh., Gen. 5:1; PRE 52. See also above, 5:5.) with trials, with an inn, (Gk.: pandokeion.) and with a legatum. (The Latin word means “bequest.”) • With aging: When the father and the son would enter a city, no one knew whom to honor. The Holy One said: By your life, I am beginning < the aging process > with you, as stated (in Gen. 24:1): NOW ABRAHAM WAS AGED. (Heb.: zaqen. In Scripture (Gen. 18:11) Abraham and Sarah are the first persons to whom this word is applied.) • With trials: Where is it shown? Abraham said to the Holy One: Sovereign of the World, if you had not given contentment to the generation of the flood, they would not have provoked you to anger. But, if you had brought trials upon them, they would not have rebelled against you. The Holy One said to him: With you I am beginning to have one suffer trials through his child. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 21:8.): SO THE CHILD (Isaac) GREW AND WAS WEANED. (The passage goes on to show how the weaning led in vs. 11 to Abraham being distressed.) {R. Joshua} [R. Osha'ya] and R. Abbin differed. (Gen. R. 53:10.) The one said that he was weaned from trials. The other said that he was weaned from the evil drive to the good drive. • With an inn, according to what is written (in Gen. 21:33): AND AT BEER-SHEBA HE PLANTED AN ESHEL, i.e., an inn. (Eshel, which is commonly translated here as “tamarisk tree,” can also mean “inn.” Gen. R. 54:6; Sot. 10a.) • With a legatum {i.e., a gift}: Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Gen. 25:6): BUT TO ABRAHAM'S SONS BY CONCUBINES ABRAHAM GAVE GIFTS.

And it came to pass after these things, that one said to Joseph: “Benold, thy father is sick” (Gen. 48:1). May it please our master to teach us whether a benediction may be recited over the light or the spices stationed at the side of a corpse? Our masters teach us: A benediction may not be recited over the light or the spices used at the side of a corpse. What is the basis of this decision? It is written: The dead praise not the Lord (Ps. 115:17).

And it came to pass after these things (Gen. 48:1). Scripture states in response to this verse: For such as are blessed of Him shall inherit the land; and they that are cursed of Him shall be cut off (Ps. 37:22). R. Meir said: Every one who blesses Israel is considered to have blessed the Holy Spirit, since it is said: For such as blessed Him. The verse is not written “blessed them” but rather blessed Him. R. Simeon the son of Yohai declared: Every one who assists Israel is considered to be assisting the Holy Spirit, as is said: Curse ye bitterly the inhabitants thereof, because they came not to help of the Lord (Judg. 5:23). Does the Holy One, blessed be He, actually require assistance? This verse teaches us that one who aids Israel is considered to be aiding the Holy Spirit. R. Ishmael said: You find that righteous men bless their children when they are about to leave this life. That is why Isaac said to Esau: And bless thee before the Lord before my death (Gen. 27:7). Therefore, when Jacob became ill, Joseph took his two sons unto his father so that he might bless them.

And it came to pass after these things (Gen. 48:1). What is written previously on this subject? And the time drew near that Israel must die, and he called his son Joseph (Gen. 47:29). He called his son Joseph because he (Joseph) was in a position of authority at that time.

... [What about all] the praise of Joseph, who exceeded in the honor of his father? And yet he did not enter into him all the time, such that were it not that they came to tell him, "Your father is sick," he would not have known! Rather this is to inform you of his righteousness. For he did not want to be alone with his father, lest he say to him, "How did your brothers act with you?" And [then] he would curse them.... Hence he did not go to his father all the time.)

The fourth wonder (was): From the day when the heavens and the earth were created no man was ill, (who) sneezed and lived, but in every place where he happened to be, whether on the way or in the market, and (when he) sneezed, his soul went out through his nostrils; until our father Jacob came and prayed for mercy concerning this, and he said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Sovereign of all the worlds! Do not take my soul from me until I have charged my sons and my household; and He was entreated of him, as it is said, "And it came to pass after these things, that one said to Joseph, Behold, thy father is sick" (Gen. 48:1). || All the kings of the earth heard (thereof), and they wondered because there had been no one like him from the days when the heavens and earth had been created. Therefore a man is in duty bound to say to his fellow: Life! when the latter sneezes, for the death of the world was changed into light, as it is said, "His neesings flash forth light" (Job 41:18).

But, in truth, all this was "measure for measure." Because of their sitting to eat bread when Joseph was in the pit, it was decreed upon them to also sit and eat bread under terrifying circumstances, until Judah himself said (Ibid. 44:16): "What shall we speak and how shall we justify ourselves? G-d has found out the sin of your servants." [And he, taking upon himself the din of Heaven, as it were,] — "Behold, we are slaves to my lord, etc." And with this, he averts the essential din for the selling [of Joseph]. [And though Joseph is not yet reconciled in this parshah and says (Ibid. 17): "The man in whose hand the goblet is found — he shall be my servant. And you, go up in peace to your father," Judah does not agree to this, viz. (Ibid. 18): "And Judah drew near to him," until the end of the episode, (Ibid. 45:1): "And Joseph could not restrain himself, etc."]

At the time Jacob made his request that Joseph bury him in the land of Israel, he did not hold out any promise of reward for Joseph when he requested his promise to bury him in the land of Israel. Neither did Jacob use the opportunity to apologize for burying Joseph's mother in the middle of nowhere instead of with his, Jacob's ancestors. By his withholding any promises or apologies Jacob made sure that Joseph should acquire the merit of performing an act of גמילות חסד that was totally altruistic. Once Joseph had promised his father to bury him in the land of Israel, and had sworn an oath concerning this, -on a different occasion,- as attested to by the words ויהי אחרי הדברים האלה, "It was after these events," in 48,1, Jacob did explain why he had buried Rachel where he did, and that Joseph would inherit in the land of Israel as if he had been his firstborn son, etc. All of this occurred after Jacob had been taken ill.

ויבא הפליט, “the one who had escapedKedorleomer’s army arrived;” according to Rashi’scommentary this was the man who later on became Og, King of Bashan who had made a name for himself by having survived the deluge, hence the prefix ה before the word: פליט, escapee. He lived so long that eventually Moses killed him (Numbers 21,35) He was not interested in saving Avram, but intended to marry Sarah after Avram would have been killed in war. G-d retaliated by paying him back in kind. He granted him long life for warning Avram on the one hand, but He foiled his design, Avram becoming victorious, and Sarah predeceasing Avram. He was chagrined to live long enough to see millions of Avram’s descendants, before himself being killed by one of them. [None of these midrashim account for the Torah’s failure to report his having survived the deluge. Ed.] Granted, if this was a fact, Moses had reason to fear him and that is why G-d told him not to be afraid of him. (Numbers 21,34). The Talmud Zevachim, 113, raises the question of how Og managed to escape the deluge and suggests that though the waters were boiling hot, in the immediate vicinity of the ark they were cool miraculously so,so as not to destroy the ark and its inhabitants. Og took advantage of this and survived. [This means that he went without food and water for 365 days. Ed.] The expression: הפליט occurs also in Ezekiel 33,21, where it refers to someone who had escaped and survived the battle of Jerusalem who reported the fall of the city and the Temple to the prophet. The verse which omits identifying who this escapee was is not so unusual that we need to look for far fetched explanations. Our author cites similar “abbreviated” constructions in Genesis 48,1; Genesis 48,2; he claims that there are numerous others.

זקנים באים בימים, “old advanced in years.” We do not find a single reference to old age in the Torah anywhere before this point. Avraham was the first human being described as having “aged.” The Midrash attributes the fact that the Torah here refers to Avraham’s age as due to his having said to G-d: “with all respect, G-d, when father and son walk together and come to a town where neither of them is known, how will they know to honour the father, seeing that they both appear as equally youthful? If You were to “crown” elderly people with a visible sign of their being old, they will know to whom to pay their respects first.” G-d answered Avraham that he had presented a valid argument and that therefore he would be the first human being upon whom this distinction would be bestowed. Along similar lines, the Midrash points out that before Yitzchok, no one was afflicted with physical handicaps, (such as Yitzchok’s blindness) Yitzchok was afflicted with such a handicap at his own request, having said to G-d: “if a human being dies without ever having endured physical handicaps and pain, the attribute of Justice will present a strong case against him by saying that he had never had to suffer any pain for any of the sins he had committed while alive. These pains would have been deemed as punishment so that upon death he could proceed to the regions of eternal bliss in the celestial regions without further delay. G-d agreed with him, and made him the first human being to be thus afflicted. We have not read about anyone falling sick before Yaakov requested that sickness become part of life on earth. Yaakov argued that unless sickness precedes death, a person would not have an opportunity to allocate his estate to his various beneficiaries. G-d agreed with him, and thus he became the first person of whom sickness preceding his death is reported in the Torah in Genesis 48,1. The two or tree days that his sickness lasted, gave him an opportunity to arrange his affairs. This is the reason why the Torah informed us that Joseph was given notice that his father was sick. Otherwise, seeing that he had 11 other sons around him in Goshen, why did special notice have to be sent to the capital where Joseph resided? To sum up: Avraham introduced the concept of old age; Yitzchok introduced the concept of people becoming afflicted with serious physical handicaps. Yaakov introduced the concept of sickness due to approaching death.

ויקרא את שם המקום קברות התאוה, “he called the name of this place: graves of lust.” The Torah did not identify who it was who bestowed this name on these graves, just as we find that in Genesis 48,1 we do not know who told Joseph that his father had been taken sick, i.e. ויאמר ליוסף, “someone called Joseph.”

ועשו אותם, “so that they will make out of them, etc.” Moses, i.e. G-d refers to skilled artisans. This verse is abbreviated, as we find in similar verses such as Genesis 48,1 ויאמר אל יוסף, “he said to Joseph,” where the subject is missing, or verse 2 in the same chapter where the person giving this information to Yaakov has also not been named.

NO MAN SHALL TAKE THE MILL OR THE UPPER MILLSTONE TO PLEDGE. The deniers (The Karaites.) say that this section is connected to and shall cheer his wife whom he hath taken (v. 5), (The reference is to the Karaite Bible commentator Levi ben Yefet. According to Levi ben Yefet the meaning of our clause is that a man (the upper millstone) or a woman (the mill) shall not abstain from sexual relations with each other. The Hebrew word for take to pledge is lo yachavol. This can be rendered, he shall not harm (Krinsky). Thus the meaning of our verse is, one shall not harm his partner by refraining from taking the upper position (the upper millstone) or the lower position (the mill).) for our verse alludes to coitus, namely, that it is forbidden to abstain from sexual intercourse. However, this is sheer nonsense. They offer as proof, Then let my wife grind unto another (Job 31:10). I have previously explained the latter. (That intercourse is metaphorically described by the term “grinding.” See I.E. on Job 31:10.) The truth is that our verse is to be taken at face value, (Despite the fact that “grind” is used as a metaphor for sexual intercourse in Job.) that a person is prohibited from taking a mill to pledge. The word chovel (one who takes a pledge) is missing from our verse. (Our verse reads, lo yachavol rechayim va-rechev. This literally means he shall not take the mill or the upper millstone to pledge. The question is: To whom does “he” refer? Hence I.E. points out that the word chovel (anyone that takes a pledge) has been omitted. Our verse should be read as if written, lo yachavol chovel rechayim va-rechev (any one that takes a pledge shall not take the mill or the upper millstone to pledge).) It is similar to and he said to Joseph (Gen. 48:1) and to whom she bore to Levi (Num. 26:29), for the meaning of the former is, someone said to Joseph, and of the latter, the one who bore, bore to Levi. (See I.E. Gen. 48:1 (Vol. 1, p. 412).) There are many such cases. (Where Scripture omits the subject.)

ינקפו Will cease. It is a neuter verb. It can also be rendered: they shall kill, ינקפו being explained to be a transitive verb with the omission of the subject (הנקפים the men that kill); comp. ויאמר ליוסף and one said to Joseph (See note on 2:4.) (Gen. 48:1)

עשו They made. The subject is not named; it is the indefinite one or they; (Comp. Note 5.) comp. ויאמר ליוסף and he (═ some one) said to Joseph (Gen. 48:1). עשוהו one has done it (A.V., Hath been already done.) (Eccles. 2:12).

יטו Let them stretch forth. Let the children of the desolate stretch forth, or let people stretch forth; (Comp. I. E. on 2:4, and Note 5.) comp. ויאמר and one said (Gen. 48:1).

ישא. The subject is the indeterminate pronoun one; one will carry away: (A. V. shall be taken away.) comp. ויאמד ליוסף And one said to Joseph (Gen. 48:1). (Comp. 2:4.)

but they did not know that I healed them They, in fact, knew, but they trod with their heels; they pretended not to know. The Aggadah in the Midrash of Rabbi Tanhuma (Gen. 48:1) expounds it in reference to the sons of Joseph. When he brought them before Jacob to bless them, Jacob perceived wicked men destined to come from Ephraim, viz. Jeroboam and Ahab, and the Holy Spirit left him, “and he said: Who are these?” Joseph prayed for mercy, and the Holy Spirit rested on Jacob and he blessed them. This is the meaning of: And I trained My spirit upon Jacob for Ephraim’s benefit, and he took them on his arms.

The word וידבר (He spoke) was not mentioned, only ויאמר (He said). I.e., the term “He spoke” was not used affectionately, for “He spoke to me” is not mentioned, as it is here. Instead it only said, “He spoke,” which lacks affection (Maharitz). You might ask that, in Parshas Beha’aloscha (Bamidbar 12:1) regarding the verse, “Miriam spoke,” Rashi explains: “Spoke” implies harsh speech — not affection, whereas “said” implies affection. The answer is: Anywhere it is written, “Adonoy spoke,” with the Tetragrammaton, it implies affection. Though it is harsh, it implies affection towards Moshe. But not, “Adonoy said,” for this can mean, “Adonoy said through a messenger.” As in (Bereishis 25:23), “Adonoy said to her,” which was through a messenger. And also as in (Shemos 18:6), “And he said to Moshe, ‘I am your father-in-law Yisro, etc.’” And also as in (Bereishis 48:1), “He said to Yoseif, ‘Behold your father is ill’.” In contrast, “he spoke,” implies affection, for it means, “(to be speaking) face-to-face,” as it says (Bamidbar 12:8), “Face-to-face I speak to him.” Although to any other prophet it would imply harsh speech, regarding Moshe it implies affection, as Hashem said, (ibid. v. 7), “Not so is My servant Moshe, etc.” See Maseches Ta’anis (30b).

Jewish tradition seems to take for granted that it is so. At the closing of the Book of Genesis, as Jacob blessed each son in turn, the blessing was not for the person standing before him, but for the entire tribe that each son was to sire. Each tribe’s destiny was couched in this encounter between father and son: “Gather and I will tell you what will befall you at the end of days” (Genesis 48:1). Future descendants of each of Jacob’s twelve sons acquired (and sometimes overcame) the same characteristic behavioral traits as their forefather, and patterns established in the lives of the original sons emerged again in later generations. Moses’s blessings, at the end of the Book of Deuteronomy, echoed those bestowed by Jacob, often reinforcing the particular message, sometimes altering the vision based on events that had transpired. These two sets of blessings defined the essence of each tribe, and the allusions within the blessings to their specific land allotments implied a unity of destiny, character, and naĥalah.

“Some time afterward” [48:1]. Hizkuni writes. From the day that the world was created, no person sneezed, since he did not want to die. He would have died from the sneeze, even in the street or on the road where he was walking. He would have died, until Jacob prayed and said, Lord of the Universe, let me first become sick, so that I will first give a testament to my children. The Holy One listened to his prayer and made him sick. Immediately, all the nations became afraid; they did not know what was wrong. Therefore, we must say a short prayer when a person sneezes. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:1.)

Until Jacob, there was no illness leading up to death; rather, one would die suddenly. Jacob came and prayed for mercy, and illness was brought to the world, allowing one to prepare for his death, as it is stated: “And one said to Joseph: Behold, your father is sick” (Genesis 48:1), which is the first time that sickness preceding death is mentioned in the Bible. Until Elisha, one did not fall ill and then heal, as everyone who fell ill would die. Elisha came and prayed for mercy and he was healed, as it is written: “Now Elisha fell ill with his illness from which he was to die” (II Kings 13:14). By inference, one can derive that he had previously fallen ill with other illnesses from which he did not die.

Apropos the death of Elisha, the Gemara says: Until the time of Abraham there was no aging, and the old and the young looked the same. Anyone who saw Abraham said: That is Isaac, and anyone who saw Isaac said: That is Abraham. Abraham prayed for mercy, that he would undergo aging, as it is stated: “And Abraham was old, well stricken in age” (Genesis 24:1). There is no mention of aging before that verse. Until the time of Jacob there was no weakness, i.e., illness. Jacob prayed for mercy and there was weakness, as it is stated: “And one said to Joseph: Behold, your father is ill” (Genesis 48:1). Until the time of Elisha, there was no ill person who recovered, and Elisha came and prayed for mercy and recovered, as it is stated: “And Elisha was fallen ill of his illness from which he was to die” (II Kings 13:14). That is the first mention of a person who was ill and who did not die from that illness.

After these events, someone said to Yoseif, Behold your father is [lying] ill. He took his two sons with him, Menasheh and Ephraim.

And after these things it was told Joseph, Behold, thy father is lying ill. And he took his two sons with him., Menasheh and Ephraim.

8. It is a segulah (special remedy) for someone who is ill to gaze at the tzitzit. This is the hidden meaning of the verse (Genesis 48:2), “Behold, your son Yosef is coming to you.” For these words hint to the tzitzit: to the amount of strings, loops and knots, {as explained in the Pri Etz Chaim }. This is: “Behold, your son Yosef is coming to you”—corresponding to the tzitzit, as a result of which, “Yisrael was strengthened.”

ויתחזק ישראל, “Israel recovered his strength.” He decided to look upon himself as if healthy, seeing that the gifts bestowed by someone close to death, as long as he is able to stand, are considered in Jewish law as having been bestowed by a person healthy in body and mind. Israel was very anxious for the blessings he was about to bestow as being viewed as the blessing of a person completely healthy. Such a person’s gifts are irrevocable in law whereas presents by a person who is on the verge of death but later recovers are considered to be revoked.

ויתחזק ישראל, “Israel strengthened himself.” He did not wish to bless his sons while bedridden, as he said that the blessing of a person clearly on the brink of dying, would not be considered as having been given by someone in possession of all his faculties.

AND ONE TOLD JACOB. Someone told Jacob. (The subject of va-yagged (and he told) is omitted.) Or it may refer to the one who said to Joseph, Behold, thy father is sick. On the other hand, he may have been a messenger sent by Jacob. (And he told refers to a messenger sent by Jacob to Joseph requesting that he come to see him. This messenger came back and he told Jacob…Behold, thy son Joseph cometh unto thee.)

ויתחזק ישראל, “Israel summoned his strength.” Reflecting on this exertion by Yaakov, our sages asked themselves why he subjected himself to the obvious pain of sitting up in bed? They say that Yaakov reasoned that if a mere general were to send him some clothing would he not go out of his way to show honor to such a general? How could he shame his own son by showing him less honor?

ויגד, the one who had carried the news to Joseph now returned to tell Yaakov that his son Joseph was about to visit him.

וישב על המטה. His feet touched the ground. This is why the Torah, when Joseph brought his children to Yaakov to be blessed, had to write: “he took them out from between his knees.” (verse 12) Another reason why the Torah mentioned these trivial sounding details, was to inform us that Yaakov still possessed the physical strength to pronounce all his final announcements with his feet firmly placed on the ground. It was only after he did not have anything else to say that he put his feet back on the bed in preparation for dying (49,33). That motion is comparable to what is described in Deuteronomy 22,2 as ואספת אל תוך ביתך, “bring it into your house,” i.e. The verb אסף, also appears in a similar sense in Judges 19,18 ואין איש מאסף אותו,”and there is no one willing to take me in.”

ויגד literally, AND HE TOLD — “he” means the messenger whoever it was — TO JACOB. It does not state plainly who told it; there are many such elliptical verses

ויתחזק ישראל AND ISRAEL STRENGTHENED HIMSELF — he said, “Although he is my son, he is a king, and I will do honour to him” (Midrash Tanchuma, Bo 6). From this we may infer that we must show honour to a person of royal rank (Cf. Menachot 98a). Similarly, Moses showed honour to the king when he said, (Exodus 11:8) “And all these, thy servants, shall come down to me” (which was only a polite way of saying. “Thou, thyself, wilt be forced to come down to me”); so, too, did Elijah: (1 Kings 18:46) “and he girded up his loins [and ran before Ahab] etc.” (Midrash Tanchuma, Bo 7)

Josef weiß nicht, wie es seinem Vater geht, will ihn nicht aufregen, ויגד: lässt ihm zuerst wie gelegentlich erzählen, daß er komme, und lässt dann erst, ויאמר, ihm sagen, er sei da.

וישב על המטה. He did this in order to pay his respects to the presence of “Royalty” in his house to the extent that he was able to under, the circumstances, considering that he was bedridden. We observe the opposite mode of behaviour described when Mordechai did not make the slightest move indicating deference for Haman in Esther 5,9 “he neither rose nor even moved from where he was seated.”

There are numerous such elliptical verses. Rashi does not explain here that the teller was Ephraim, as he explained above, since “he took his two sons with him” implies that Ephraim was with Yoseif and went with him to Yaakov.

From here that we must honor royalty... [Rashi knows this] because Yoseif needed Yaakov [to bless his sons], yet Yaakov bowed to him nevertheless. But before (47:31), Rashi explained [the bowing differently:] “When it is the time of the fox, bow to him.” This is because Yaakov needed Yoseif [to swear to bury him].

And your servants will come down to me... Moshe knew that even Pharaoh would come down, as in fact happened. He said “your servants” [instead of “you”] to honor royalty.

One told Jacob and said: Behold, your son Joseph is coming to you. Joseph likely lived in the capital city, which was far from Goshen, and therefore he could not visit his father frequently. When he was notified that Joseph was coming to visit, Israel exerted himself, and he sat upon the bed instead of lying on it, as he wanted to greet the viceroy in a dignified manner. In addition, perhaps sitting was the more appropriate position for the nature of the conversation that Jacob wished to conduct with his son.

ויתחזק ישראל, “Israel strengthened himself;” in order that the blessing he would bestow would be that of a healthy human being.

“Israel summoned his strength” [48:2]. Jacob sat up in his bed, even though he was weak, because Joseph had come. He said: even though Joseph is a son, he is also a king and one must do honor to a king, even a gentile king. Moses Our Teacher honored Pharaoh. (Rashi, Genesis, 48:2.) Hizkuni writes. He got up because he wanted to show that he was still mentally competent, just like when he was healthy. When a sick person lies weakly and says something, they can respond, but they might not accept it. When he becomes healthy again, one might say that he said it or did it without mental competence. Therefore, now Jacob wanted to bless his children. Thus, he got up and wanted to show that he was healthy and mentally competent, so that they could not retract his blessings. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:2.) Jacob said: the Holy One appeared to me and said to me, I will make you a nation. At the time I had all of my children, except for Benjamin, who was born after these words. The words of the Holy One were heard that I would have many children. Therefore, I give the blessing to Joseph’s children so that they should also have a share in the land of Israel, just like Reuben, Simeon and the other brothers. (Rashi, Genesis, 35:11.) Jacob did this to honor Rachel, his most beloved wife. Joseph was Rachel’s first born and therefore Jacob gave him double the portion of the other brothers. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:5.)

Aleph, Chet, Hei, Ayin – Gimel, Yud, Caf, Kof “His mouth is most sweet” due to the imprinted letters that are engraved on it with their crowns. The sweetness in the palate comes from letters engraved on it according to the sequence of the three columns and the receiving Malchut. This sequence crowns them. The letters Aleph, Chet, Hei, Ayin are engraved on the throat, each with three columns. The three columns in the Aleph, its right column, drives away kings; the left column removes kings from their kingship, the central column upholds kings. Of the three columns in the Chet, its right column drives away and descends; the left column ascends and crowns; the central column vanquishes with fire and engraves with wind. The three columns in the Hei are receiving from Ima, that is, out of what the Female receives from Ima. The central column of Ima strikes the Female; from the left column of Ima, the Female extends into a large Female, that is, she receives from it the maturity of the left column. The central column of Ima lies in the desire of the holy city for Chassadim that makes it unite with the central column. The places of right and left are interconnected as said, “the mountain of myrrh and to the hill of frankincense” (Shir Hashirim 4:6). Of the three columns of the Ayin, its right column is the brightness in the form of the level; its left column is the engraving in the form of the level; the central column is the stretching branches that join the engraved spirits at their sides.

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:49). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]….” – this is the offering that he presented in the name of Jacob, who had him precede Manasseh, and in the name of Joseph, who, because of his love, Jacob blessed him all those blessings, just as it says: “He blessed Joseph and said: The God [before whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked…]” (Genesis 48:15), and it says: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh…” (Genesis 48:20). “Dish [kaarat]” – this is Jacob; do not read it as kaarat, but rather, as akeret, who uprooted [akar] the right hand from Manasseh in favor of Ephraim. “Silver” – after, “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20); what he said to Joseph: “His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know; he too shall become a people…” (Genesis 48:19). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – corresponding to the one hundred and thirty words that there are from “he laid it on Ephraim’s head” (Genesis 48:14) until “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – this is Joseph, who was cast away [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “One” – as he was king in Egypt, just as it says: “One of the people (Avimelekh said this referring to himself.) almost lay [with your wife]” (Genesis 26:10). Likewise it says: “Joseph was the ruler over the land…” (Genesis 42:6). “Silver” – after “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver,” as due to his wisdom he was privileged to achieve kingship, just as it says: “After God has disclosed all this to you.… You will be in charge of my house…” (Genesis 41:39–40). “Seventy shekels in the sacred shekel” – as Gabriel came and added one letter from the name of the Holy One blessed be He to his name and taught him seventy languages, as it is stated: “He established it as a precept for Joseph [bihosef] (He added a heh, changing Joseph [Yosef] to Yehosef.) when he went out over Egypt; I learned a language I had not known” (Psalms 81:6), as were it not so, the Egyptians would not have accepted Joseph to rule over them. “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” – Jacob and Joseph were both full-fledged righteous men, and the two of them resembled one another. This accords with what Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph” (Genesis 37:2). It should have said nothing other than: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Reuben.” Why is it stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”? It is to teach you that Joseph resembled his father in every respect. Just as Jacob was born circumcised, so too, Joseph was born circumcised. Just as this one, his mother was barren, so too, that one, his mother was barren. Just as this one, his mother suffered from the pain of her pregnancy, so too that one, his mother suffered during birth. Just as this one, his mother bore two, so too that one, his mother bore two. Just as this one, his brother seeks to kill him, this one, too, his brothers seek to kill him. This one, his brother hates [soneh] him, and that one, likewise. This one is a shepherd and that one is a shepherd. This one is hated [nistam] and that one is hated. (See Genesis 27:41, 49:23.) This one was stolen from twice: “Stolen in the day and stolen at night” (Genesis 31:39); that one, there is a double expression of stealing: “For I was abducted [gunov gunavti] [from the land of the Hebrews]” (Genesis 40:15). This one was blessed with ten blessings, (See Genesis 27:28–29.) and that one was blessed with ten blessings. (See Deuteronomy 33:13–17.) This one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel, and that one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel. This one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel, and that one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel. This one begot children outside of the Land of Israel, and that one begot children outside of the Land of Israel. This one, angels accompanied him, and that one, angels accompanied him. (A midrash says that when Joseph went to his brothers at the behest of his father, three angels accompanied him.) This one ascended to greatness by means of a dream (See Genesis 28:10–16.) and that one ascended to greatness by means of a dream. This one, his father-in-law’s household was blessed on his account, and that one, his father-in-law’s (According to Bereshit Rabba 86:3, Joseph’s father-in-law Potifera was Potifar.) household was blessed on his account. This one descended to Egypt, and that one descended to Egypt. This one ended the famine and that one ended the famine. (See Bereshit Rabba 89:9.) This one administered an oath to his son, and that one administered an oath to his brothers. This one died in Egypt, and that one died in Egypt. This one was embalmed, and that one was embalmed. This one, his bones ascended, and that one, his bones ascended. Because Joseph resembled his father, that is why it is stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”; and that is why it is stated: “Both of them full…” – regarding Jacob and Joseph. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:50). “One…ladle [kaf]” – it corresponds to the palm of his right hand, which he placed on Ephraim’s head. Why does it call it “one”? It is because it is more significant than the left. “Gold…ten shekels” – it corresponds to the ten words that there are from: “Israel extended his right hand” (Genesis 48:14) until “and he was the younger” (Genesis 48:14). “Filled with incense” – Jacob saw this matter through the divine spirit, that Ephraim was worthy for him to place his right hand on his head. Likewise it says: “Guiding [sikel] his hands, as Manasseh was the first born” (Genesis 48:14). His hands were guided [hiskilu] by the divine spirit, just as it says: “Maskil of Eitan the Ezraḥite” (Psalms 89:1). (This is a psalm stated by Eitan the Ezraḥite with divine guidance.) “One young bull, one ram, one sheep in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:51). “One young [ben bakar] bull” – corresponding to Abraham, as it is stated: “Abraham ran to the cattle [habakar]” (Genesis 18:7). “One ram” – corresponding to Isaac, in whose regard it is written: “[Abraham…] took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son” (Genesis 22:13). “One sheep” – corresponding to Jacob, in whose regard it is written: “Jacob separated the sheep” (Genesis 30:40). Why did he sacrifice these three kinds of burnt offerings? It corresponds to the three patriarchs, corresponding to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “Let my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, be called upon them” (Genesis 48:16). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:52). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Elishama son of Amihud” (Numbers 7:53). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to Joseph, as it is written: “They slaughtered a goat” (Genesis 37:31). Why did he sacrifice this corresponding to Joseph? It is because when Jacob blessed them with the name of the three patriarchs, likewise, he blessed them with the name of Joseph and made them dependent upon him, as it is stated: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the two blessings that he blessed them: the former, “[may the angel…] bless the lads” (Genesis 48:16), and the latter, “by you Israel shall bless….” “Five rams, [five goats, five lambs]” – three species, corresponding to three generations that Joseph saw for Ephraim, who were attributed to Joseph, and they were patrilineal houses, as it is stated: “Joseph saw great-grandchildren from Ephraim” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise it says: “These are the sons of Ephraim by their families: Of Shutelaḥ.… And these are the sons of Shutelaḥ: Of Eran…” (Numbers 26:35–36). Ephraim, Shutelaḥ, Eran, these are three sons from three generations. Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five words (In the Hebrew phrase.) of “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20), as it is from there that Ephraim merited to present his offering first. “This was the offering…” – because he presented the offering in this order, the Holy One blessed be He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Elishama….”

And thus with Jacob, viz. (Genesis 28:2) "And Israel strengthened himself and sat up on the bed" (to accord honor to Joseph, the ruler at that time).

Why did Pharaoh and his servants approach him, saying: Get you? The time Pharaoh told him: Get thee from me, see my face no more (ibid. 10:29), he (Moses) insisted: But we shall not leave until all these servants shall come down unto me (ibid. 11:9), to escort us from this place. This verse indicates that Moses paid homage to royalty, since he did not say to him: “You and all your servants.” In fact, the Holy One, blessed be He, had previously charged Moses and Aaron to be respectful to royalty, as it is said: And the Lord spoke unto Moses and Aaron, and gave them a charge unto the children of Israel, and unto Pharaoh king of Egypt (ibid. 6:13). Joseph was respectful to royalty when he said: It is not in me; God will give Pharaoh an answer of peace (Gen. 41:6). Jacob was respectful to royalty; and Israel strengthened himself, and sat upon the bed (ibid. 49:2). Elijah paid homage to royalty, as is said: And the hand of the Lord was on Elijah (I Kings 18:46). Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah also were respectful to royalty, and so was Daniel.

For one who vows that a bed is forbidden to him, it is permitted to lie in a dargash, which is not commonly called a bed; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: A dargash is included in the category of a bed. Everyone agrees that for one who vows that a dargash is forbidden to him, it is permitted to lie in a bed. For one who vows that the city is forbidden to him, it is permitted to enter the Shabbat boundary of that city, the two-thousand-cubit area surrounding the city, and it is prohibited to enter its outskirts, the seventy-cubit area adjacent to the city. However, for one who vows that a house is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to enter only from the doorstop and inward.

ויתחזק ישראל וישב על המטה . Israel's ability to strengthen himself and sit on "the bed," was due to "his bed" being שלימה. Hail to anyone who merits it. Every pious person constantly prays that he will not be the cause of any פסול, defect, among his children or children's children. All that man can leave behind in this world are children and grandchildren who by their own righteousness bear testimony to the piety of their fathers.

ויבא הפליט, “the one who had escapedKedorleomer’s army arrived;” according to Rashi’scommentary this was the man who later on became Og, King of Bashan who had made a name for himself by having survived the deluge, hence the prefix ה before the word: פליט, escapee. He lived so long that eventually Moses killed him (Numbers 21,35) He was not interested in saving Avram, but intended to marry Sarah after Avram would have been killed in war. G-d retaliated by paying him back in kind. He granted him long life for warning Avram on the one hand, but He foiled his design, Avram becoming victorious, and Sarah predeceasing Avram. He was chagrined to live long enough to see millions of Avram’s descendants, before himself being killed by one of them. [None of these midrashim account for the Torah’s failure to report his having survived the deluge. Ed.] Granted, if this was a fact, Moses had reason to fear him and that is why G-d told him not to be afraid of him. (Numbers 21,34). The Talmud Zevachim, 113, raises the question of how Og managed to escape the deluge and suggests that though the waters were boiling hot, in the immediate vicinity of the ark they were cool miraculously so,so as not to destroy the ark and its inhabitants. Og took advantage of this and survived. [This means that he went without food and water for 365 days. Ed.] The expression: הפליט occurs also in Ezekiel 33,21, where it refers to someone who had escaped and survived the battle of Jerusalem who reported the fall of the city and the Temple to the prophet. The verse which omits identifying who this escapee was is not so unusual that we need to look for far fetched explanations. Our author cites similar “abbreviated” constructions in Genesis 48,1; Genesis 48,2; he claims that there are numerous others.

ויאסוף רגליו אל המיטה, “he gathered his feet into the bed;” he had previously gotten up in bed in order to give a blessing to Joseph’s sons as we know from Genesis 48,2, where he was described as summoning his strength and sitting upright on his bed. As soon as he had completed his blessings he made ready to die.

dem ist das Sofa. דרגש, ed. Lowe דרגיש, syr. ܕܰܪܓܽܘܫܬܳܐ, Sofa, Sänfte, Bahre, vgl. Sanh. II, 3; Mikw. IX, 5; Tos. Nid. IX, 16. In dem Targ. Jon. (דרגשא) und im paläst. Targum (דרגושה) wird das bibl.-hebr. מטה Gen. 47, 31, יצוע Gen. 48, 2, מטה כבודה Ez. 23, 41 (דרגישן) mit דרגש übersetzt. Zur Etymologie dieses Wortes weist Brüll in seinen Jahrbüchern IV, S. 118 auf das, was Spiegel, ZDMG 26, 705 zur Erklärung des Wortes Haudarakhta des Avesta bemerkt: „Es muss von darydraj, griech. δϱαττω herkommen und das Zusammengehaltene, Compacte, vielleicht auch das Umzäunte bedeuten.“ Dieser Stamm draj muss demnach frühzeitig in das Syrische eingedrungen sein. Im Armenischen findet sich gleichfalls dieses Wort als darkht = Garten, Paradies, vgl. Spiegel, ibid. und Hübschmann, ZDMG 46, 235, N. 25. — Über דרגש herrscht schon unter den Amoräern eine Meinungsverschiedenheit. Der eine erklärt es Ned. 56a als „ערסא דגדא, Bett des Glückes“, ein reich ausgestattetes Bett, das dem Hausgenius, der Fortuna geweiht war, aber sonst zum Schlafen nicht verwendet wurde. Der andre beschreibt es als ערסא דצלא, ledernes Bett, das nicht so vornehm wie מטה war und zum Ruhen diente. Als Unterschied zwischen מטה und דרגש wird Ned. 56b angegeben, dass „bei מטה die Gurte um die Bettstangen gespannt waren, während bei דרגש auf der Innenseite Löcher waren, durch die die Gurte gezogen waren“; nach einer andren Erklärung „gingen bei דרגש die Gurte nicht durch die Löcher des Holzes, sondern durch eigens dazu angebrachte Schlingen.“ Vgl. Krengel, das Hausgerät in der Mischna, S. 28—30, ausführlich in Kobak, Jeschurun 1872, S. 34ff. Maimon. erklärt דרגש als ein kleines. niedriges Polster, das man vor das grössere, מטה, stellt, also Stufe, Tritt.

I think we should consider the recurring theme in Rashi of respect shown even to evil kings such as Paroh and Achav (please see Rashi to Bereishit 48:2 s.v. Vayitchazeik Yisrael) as an answer. Presenting Nevuchadnetzar and his empire as gold expresses respect to Nevuchadnetzar even at a time when he is being rebuked. This exhibition of respect may significantly contribute to his positive reception to the message (at least at first).

Hizkuni writes. He got up because he wanted to show that he was still mentally competent, just like when he was healthy. When a sick person lies weakly and says something, they can respond, but they might not accept it. When he becomes healthy again, one might say that he said it or did it without mental competence. Therefore, now Jacob wanted to bless his children. Thus, he got up and wanted to show that he was healthy and mentally competent, so that they could not retract his blessings. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:2.)

It was told to Yaakov, saying, Behold, your son, Yoseif, has come to you. Yisrael gathered his strength and sat up in bed.

And it was announced to Jakob, saying, Behold, thy son Joseph hath come to thee: and Israel strengthened himself, and sat upon the bed.

א-ל שדי נראה אלי בלוז, that was the location where G’d had introduced Himself to Yaakov with His attribute of Shaddai. He had blessed him saying: “be fruitful and multiply. (35,10-11)

נראה אלי בלוז, when I returned from Padan Aram. (Compare 35,11 אני א-ל שדי, פרה ורבה)

(3-7) Durch das ועתה des V. 5 ist es klar, daß die Erteilung der בכורה an Josef durch Einsetzung seiner beiden Söhne als besondere Stämme in den vorhergehenden Versen eine vorbereitende Erläuterung finden müsse. Nun ist es, wie uns scheint, wohl nicht denkbar, daß dies in dem Umstande liegen könne, daß, als Jakob auf seiner Heimkehr die Verheißung geworden: הנני מפרך וגוי ונתתיך לקהל עמים oder wie die Verheißung (Kap. 25, 11) wörtlich lautet: פרה ורבה גוי וקהל גוים יהי׳ ממך seiner Familie nur noch der Zuwachs durch Benjamin, Efrajim und Menasche bevorstand, somit dies גוים sich nur auf diese beiden letzteren beziehen konnte, und sie somit als zwei getrennte Stämme von vornherein bezeichnet gewesen wären. Denn schwerlich kann in einem Familienkreise, der bereits aus elf Söhnen bestand, ein solcher Zuwachs so bedeutend erscheinen, daß er in den Worten הנני מפרך והרביתיך angekündigt sein dürfte. Vielmehr, wie wir dies bereits oben zur Stelle angedeutet, ist mit dem קהל גוים, hier קהל עמים, die durchaus für dieses Volk charakteristische Bestimmung gegeben, daß es innerhalb seiner vollkommenen, durch die Gemeinsamkeit der einen geistigen und sittlichen Aufgabe gegebenen Einheit, eine Mannigfaltigkeit verschieden gearteter Stämme umschließen soll. Es soll das Ackerbau- wie das Handelsvolk, das Kriegervolk wie das Volk der Wissenschaft usw. und somit als Mustervolk die Wahrheit faktisch darstellen, daß der eine gemeinsame Menschen- und Völkerberuf, wie ihn das Gottesgesetz offenbart, durch keine besondere Art des Berufs und der Anlage bedingt ist, sondern die Gesamtmenschheit in allen Nuancen ihrer Mannigfaltigkeit in ganz gleicher Weise ihren Beruf in der einen, allen gemeinsamen geistigen und sittlichen Lebensaufgabe finde. Die Gliederung in verschiedene Stämme und die daraus hervorgehende Teilung des verheißenen Bodens an diese gesondert zu erhaltenen Stämme, sie ist es, auf welche hier hingewiesen ist. Nur in ihrer Folge hat es überhaupt Bedeutung, daß Efrajim und Menasche zu zwei besonderen Stämmen erwachsen sollen. Ohne sie wäre ja jede Verschiedenheit in die Gesamtnationalmasse aufgegangen, sowie auch das Land an die Nation im ganzen und nicht nach Stämmen zur Verteilung gekommen wäre. — אחזת עולם. Obgleich wir es nun schon Jahrhunderte lang nicht mehr im Besitze haben, so ist es doch unsere ewige אחוזה בה נֵאָחֵז בה wir sind an es gefesselt, es hält uns, wenngleich wir es nicht haben.

Jacob said to Joseph: God Almighty appeared to me in Luz, also known as Beit El, in the land of Canaan, and He blessed me.

To the extent that man is able to amass both physical and material assets, he is able to share his wealth. A rich man can enrich others in accordance with the amount of personal wealth in excess of his needs. A man of renowned moral stature can transmit to others some of the qualities he has acquired. Whereas physical powers have a tendency to decline with advancing age, spiritual powers are enhanced by the onset of old age. As a result of this phenomenon, blessings and prayers for others are usually reserved till near life's end, since at that point the person bestowing them is at his spiritually most potent. Jacob imparted both blessings and insights to his children when on his deathbed. The prophet Elijah bequeathed his insights to his disciple Elisha when he was about to depart this earth. (Kings II chapter 2) In fact, he warned Elisha that unless the latter was able to watch him ascend, there was no guarantee that he, Elijah had bequeathed enough insights to ensure that Elisha's mission as his successor would be successful. Moses too, had not divested himself of sufficient earthly shells to communicate the maximum amount of blessings he was capable of to his people, until he had actively prepared for death. When Elijah had told Elisha that the latter's powers of observation held the key to the amount of prophetic spirit he would acquire, he was in effect telling him that in order for blessings to be fully effective, both the donor and the recipient have to be in a state of preparedness. This is somewhat like the waters of a fountain going to waste, unless they are absorbed by containers especially prepared to receive them.

The fact that Jacob's dream represented only the beginning of Divine revelations at its lowest level, is attested to by the following: 1) After G-d’s promise to Jacob in the dream, Jacob's statements and vow prefaced by the words "if G-d will be with me," shows that, to Jacob, the message had not been so clear. 2) Jacob is portrayed as being like the servant who serves his master for the sake of the reward. He promises to give tithes if things go well, hardly the stature prophets are made of. 3) Jacob constantly seems fearful during the coming years. 4) Even when Jacob prays to G-d immediately prior to his encounter with Esau, he does not even once refer to the promise made to him by G-d in this dream. 5) Jacob's unaccountable delay in fulfilling his vow, even after G-d said to him, "I am the G-d to whom you have vowed at Bet El, go and keep your vow." Jacob, not yet having returned home safely, seems in no hurry to fulfil this vow. In view of all this, and in view of the statements of our sages that the gift of prophecy is bestowed only on persons who are possessed of certain qualifications, one of which is personal wealth, we must reject the view of those commentators who see in this dream revelations going beyond anything experienced by either Abraham or Isaac. It is significant that Jacob is described as dreaming, and that even after awakening from his "sleep,” the ladder is not called "a vision." Other people who had visions during their sleep, are usually described as waking from a "dream," not from "sleep." Compare Pharaoh in Genesis 41,8 or Solomon in Kings I 3,15. Based on Maimonides in Moreh Nevuchim Part two, Chapter forty-five, we are entitled to assume that in our case we do not deal with a prophetic vision. On the other hand, Jacob's own statement that "G-d is in this place," seems to indicate that Jacob at least considered the possibility that what he had dreamed was a vision. Perhaps Jacob's doubt about the significance of what he had dreamed stemmed from the fact that he had been inadequately prepared to become the recipient of prophetic insights. Abraham, who had gone to sacrifice Isaac, an irreversible act should he have misunderstood what he believed to be Divine instructions, was obviously certain that the source of that command was not a figment of his imagination. We can understand the conditional nature of Jacob's vow then as stemming from this very uncertainty about whether in fact he had been granted prophetic insight. The monument that he erects is built on the premise that he may have been granted a vision. He vows that if all the conditions in that message will be fulfilled, he will view this as confirmation that he had indeed been the recipient of a communication from heaven. Only after the events in Shechem (Genesis Chapter 34), when G-d tells him to go up to Bet El, does Jacob become convinced that the dream of the ladder had indeed been a revelation. In retrospect then, that dream looms larger than ever. During all the years when he had difficulties with Laban and Esau, he had been far from certain that he had been granted a revelation at that time already. When finally, in Chapter thirty-five, Jacob refers to G-d as elokim, instead of as hereafter eyl shaddai, this indicates that he had now come to the resolution of his former doubts about the matter.

Firstly, in the vision beginning, “And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the Lord appeared unto Abram and said unto him: I am God Almighty …” (4. Gen. 17:1.) Having begun with “Lord” in accordance with the principle I mentioned—that Abraham possessed this important knowledge—the writer of the Torah continues the rest of the vision without mentioning “Lord” again, for the vision refers to material things appealing to the imagination, such as Abraham’s becoming the patriarch for many peoples through Isaac and Ishmael; and also the command to make the sign in his flesh, and that of his descendants. For this reason “God” is used, for being equivocal, it refers to the Heavenly Spheres as well as the imaginative faculty predominating in every prophet, except Moses. (5. Guide II:36.) This is certainly the case when those prophets perceive that which is of a material nature and imagined, as has been explained. The Torah is likewise precise in its use of Shaddai (“Almighty”), which, being an adjective similar to davvai, refers to someone victorious (alone) whenever | large numbers of people would (ordinarily) be necessary, as has been explained. (6. See below chap. X, n. 3, where this name is discussed.) It is the same in the Lord’s words to Jacob, and in those of Isaac to Jacob (when he said), “and God Almighty bless thee and make thee fruitful and multiply thee.” (7. Gen. 28:3.) It is likewise in Jacob’s words to Joseph, (when saying) “God Almighty appeared unto me at Luz in the land of Canaan and said unto me …” (8. Gen. 48:3.)

Remember that it is this force which the Torah described in chapter 12,8 when Avram is first reported as having built an altar to G-d as “the G-d who had appeared to him.” [This is unlikely; we have other examples where the vowel under the letter א in the word נראה points to a feminine attribute of G-d such as in Genesis 48,3 or Exodus 3,16 so that to consider the word “hanir-eh” in Genesis 12,8 as a reference to a feminine attribute of G-d does seem very forced. Ed]

Yaakov said to Yoseif, Almighty Shaddai appeared [became revealed] to me in Luz, in the land of Canaan, and He blessed me.

And Jakob said to Joseph: El Shadai revealed Himself to me at Luz, in the land of Kenaan, and blessed me.

ונמתין לקהל עמים, “and I will make you into a community of nations.” Even though G-d had used the plural mode, only Binyamin had been born for him after that. This being so, Yaakov said: “I must transfer the unfulfilled part of that blessing as belonging to one of my sons and I hereby designate you (Joseph)”. Ephrayim and Menashe, each being one of the 12 tribes of Israel, are viewed as representing fulfillment of that part of G-d’s blessing.

[BEHOLD, I WILL MAKE THEE FRUITFUL.] According to Saadiah Gaon Jacob told Joseph: God appeared to me and told me, Behold I will make thee fruitful. However, following this promise I had no other children, and Rachel died. I now know that the Divine promise of Behold, I will make thee fruitful was said concerning your children. (Hence Ephraim and Manasseh…shall be mine (v. 5).) This interpretation is totally unpalatable. What difference is there between Joseph’s children and Reuben’s children? (How did Jacob know the promise referred to Joseph’s children and not to Reuben’s children when both are his descendants and the Divine promise, Behold, I will make thee fruitful could apply to both?) Furthermore, Benjamin was born after this prophetic vision. (The vision in which God told Jacob, Behold, I will make thee fruitful, is recorded in Gen. 35:9-16. Benjamin’s birth follows immediately in verse 18. Hence it may refer to him.) I believe that Jacob told Joseph the following: “God appeared to me and told me that the land of Canaan will be an everlasting possession for my children. I now give you a first born’s share (Since the land was given to me, I may pass it on as I see fit.) in this land. Therefore let Ephraim and Manasseh share in the land in the same manner as Reuben and Simeon, my two eldest sons (v. 5). However, any children that will be born to you in addition to Ephraim and Manasseh (Viz., And thy issue, that thou begettest after them. I.E. explains holadta (literally, you begat) as an imperfect, you will beget.) shall be called after the name of their just noted brothers, namely, they will receive their inheritance among them (v. 6). (They will be included in the Ephraimites and Manassites.) I take issue with the one who interprets And thy issue, that thou begettest after them (v. 6) as referring to the children of Machir the son of Manasseh who were born upon Joseph’s knees (Gen. 50:23). If his interpretation is correct, why does Scripture say, they shall be called after the name of their brethren in their inheritance (v. 6)? (Machir’s children received Machir’s share in the land. Hence Scripture should have stated “after the name of their father” in their inheritance.) And what if one argues, but we do not find that Joseph had any other children after Manasseh and Ephraim? (If Scripture tells us, and thy issue, that thou begettest after them, then it must be true. If we cannot apply it to Joseph’s sons other than Manasseh and Ephraim, since he had no others, then the Bible must be referring to grandchildren.) It is not convincing. It is quite possible that Joseph had additional children but they are not mentioned because they received their inheritance among their brothers. (Since they were included in the tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim, there was no reason to mention them.) There are many other such instances in Scripture. (Where names were left out because they had no significance.)

הנני מפרך והרבך, "I am fructifying and multiplying you, etc." The repetition of these expressions, i.e. both "multiply and fructify," alludes to G'd's promise to Jacob in 35,11 that he would be fruitful and would multiply. At the time he had interpreted that promise to mean that two more sons (at least) would be born to him. In the meantime he had found out that only one more son, i.e. Benjamin was born to him.

הנני מפרך, we have explained this term on 35,11 as having been a necessary introduction leading up to taking possession of the land of Canaan in due course. Yaakov explains that in view of the fact that his sons will be the ones according to whom the keys in the distribution of that land will be determined, he wanted now already to establish that both of Joseph’s sons will rank equally with Joseph’s brothers in this respect.

ונתתיך לקהל עמים AND I WILL MAKE OF THEE AN ASSEMBLY OF PEOPLES — He announced to me that there were yet to issue from me an assembly of peoples (i.e. at least two more tribes). Now, it is true that He then said to me, (Genesis 35:11) “A nation and an assembly of nations [shall be of thee]”, but when He said “a nation” He intended it to refer to Benjamin who was not yet born, and this promise of “a nation” has been fulfilled by the birth of Benjamin, and for that reason I do not mention it now. “An assembly of nations [shall be of thee]”, however, presupposes that two more would descend from me besides Benjamin. Consequently, since no other son besides Benjamin was born to me, He was really telling me that one of my tribes (i.e. the tribe formed by one of my sons) would be divided so as to constitute at least two tribes, thus giving that son more importance, and that privilege I confer upon you (Genesis Rabbah 82:4; Pesikta Rabbati 3).

ונתתיך לקהל עמים ונתתי את הארץ, at the time Yaakov received this promise all his sons with the exception of Binyamin had already been born, and G’d had already said to me when I left on the way to Charan (in the dream of the ladder) “the land which you lie on I shall give to you and to your descendants.” (28,13) If so, it had been G’d’s intention at that time already to give me a “community of nations, i.e. separate tribes. Seeing that you and your children are my descendants and it is unreasonable to assume that G’d had had only you personally in mind when speaking of קהל עמים, a community of nations, it is clear to me that I have the right to designate both these sons of yours as being part of this concept קהל, i.e. that each of them will become a founding father of one of these tribes which constitute this community of nations.

That one of my tribes is destined to be divided... I.e., the division into two is considered as two extra sons.

He said to me: Behold, I will make you fruitful and multiply you, and I will render you an assembly of peoples, and I will give this land to your descendants after you as an eternal portion. Jacob received these two promises in his dream at Beit El on his way to Haran (28:12–15) and in his prophetic vision in the same location many years later, upon his return to Canaan (35:9–12). Although the greatness he was promised had yet to materialize, the assurance gave him the strength and authority to deliver blessings that would shape the future of his family and their land, as though God’s promises had already come to pass at that time.

ויאמר אליו הנני מפרך והרבתיך וכו', “He said to him: here I am about to fructify you and to multiply you, etc.” Rashi explains that Yaakov reminded Joseph that at the time when G’d had said to him that he would be the founder of nations and communities of nations (35,11), he had only had 11 sons, so that part of the blessing had not yet been fulfilled. He therefore directed that the as yet unfulfilled part of that blessing should be applied to Joseph and his sons. This is also the reason why he mentioned Rachel’s death at this juncture. Seeing that the missing part of the blessing could not have applied to any further children whom Rachel would have, it must apply to existing children, and he chose to channel this blessing to Joseph and his children. It is also possible that seeing he had allocated to the two sons of Joseph territory in the land of Israel on the same basis as that of Reuven and Shimon, i.e. as that of his actual sons, he mentioned that he had received the authority to make such allocations from G’d Himself.

(Fol. 5b) Now let us see, whence do both R. Juda and R. Simon deduce that one tribe is also called Kahal (congregation)? From the following passage (II Chron. 20, 5) And Jehoshaphat stood forward in the Kahal of Judah and Jerusalem. R. Acha b. Jacob raised the following objection: "Perhaps there it was Kahal, because the tribe Benjamin, too, was there, hence more than one tribe? Therefore," said R. Acha b. Jacob, "it is inferred from the following (Gen. 48, 4) And I will make of thee a Kahal of people; now, at that time, Benjamin had not yet been born, and the Almighty said to Jacob: One Kahal more is born to you [referring to Benjamin]." Said R. Sheba to R. Cahana: "Perhaps the Holy One, praised be He! meant, now as Benjamin is born, and you have twelve tribes you are called Kahal?" Whereupon R. Cahana replied: "Do you mean to say that only twelve tribes are called Kahal, but eleven tribes are not called Kahal?

R. Acha b. Jacob said: "The tribe of Levi is not called Kahal at all, as from the abovecited verse (Ib. ib. 12) it is to be understood that only those who inherited landed property in the land of Israel are called a tribe, but not the Levites, who had no such inheritance." But if so then there are less than twelve tribes? Said Abaye: "It reads there (Ib.) that Ephraim and Manashah (the two sons of Joseph) are considered as Reuben and Simon; hence there is another tribe which completes the number."

R Samuel b. Nachmeini said in the name of R. Jonathan: "Whoever says that Reuben (the son of Jacob) sinned, errs, for it is said (Gen. 35, 22.) Now the sons of Jacob were twelve. It is intended to inform us that they were all equal [in righteousness]. How then shall we explain the first part of the above-mentioned passage? It is intended to teach that he (Reuben) deranged his father's bed, and the Scriptures charge him as if he had been lying with Bilhah." We are taught that R. Simon h. Elazar said: "That righteous one (Reuben) is cleared of that crime, that such an occurrence never happened to him, for how could it possibly be that a man whose descendants were to stand on Mt. Ebal and proclaim (Deu. 29, 20.) Cursed be he who lieth with his father's wife, would commit such a sin. But how then is the passage (Gen. 35, 22 ) And he lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine, to be explained? It is intended to inform us that he demanded redress for the humiliation inflicted upon his mother saying: 'When my mothers sister lived and proved a vexation to her, it was bearable; but that the servant of my mother's sister should be a vexation to my mother is unbearable!' Whereupon he went and deranged the bed of Bilhah." Others say he deranged two beds, that of the Schechina and that of his father, and this explains that which is written (Gen. 48, 4.) Unstable as water, thou shalt not have the excellence, because thou did go up to thy father's bed; then didst thou defile the Shechina of my couch. Do not read Yetzu'ey (my bed), but read Yetzuay (the beds).

If the judges of the court issued an erroneous ruling and the entire congregation or a majority thereof performed a transgression on the basis of their ruling, the judges bring a bull as an unwitting communal sin-offering. And if the erroneous ruling involved idol worship, the judges bring a bull and a goat, as it is written in the Torah (see Numbers 15:24); this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not the court that brings the offering, it is the people. Twelve tribes, each of which performed a transgression, bring twelve bulls, i.e., each tribe brings one, and for idol worship they bring twelve bulls and twelve goats, as each tribe is a congregation. Rabbi Shimon says: They bring thirteen bulls; and for idol worship they bring thirteen bulls and thirteen goats, a bull and a goat for each and every tribe and a bull and a goat for the court. The mishna continues: If the judges of the court issued a ruling, and at least seven tribes, or a majority of each of those tribes, performed a transgression on the basis of their ruling, the judges bring a bull; and for idol worship they bring a bull and a goat. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: The seven tribes that sinned bring seven bulls, i.e., each tribe brings one bull, and each of the rest of the tribes, i.e., those that did not sin, brings one bull on the basis of the sin of the other tribes, as even those who did not sin bring an offering on the basis of the actions of the sinners. Rabbi Shimon says: When seven tribes sin eight bulls are brought as offerings, one bull for each and every tribe and one bull for the court. And for idol worship, eight bulls and eight goats are brought, one bull and one goat for each and every tribe and one bull and one goat for the court. If the court of one of the tribes issued a ruling and the majority of that tribe performed a transgression on the basis of its ruling, that tribe is liable to bring an offering and the rest of all the tribes are exempt; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. And the Rabbis say: One is liable to bring an offering for an unwitting communal sin only for rulings of the High Court alone, as it is stated: “And if the entire assembly of Israel shall act unwittingly” (Leviticus 4:13), from which it is derived that there is liability only for a ruling of the assembly, i.e., the court, of the entire people, but not for a ruling of the assembly of that particular tribe.

bringen zwölf Stiere. Denn הקהל bezeichnet die Gemeinde Israels, und zwar wird jeder Stamm „קהל“ genannt, da in Gen. 48, 4 לקהל עמים sich auf Benjamin bezieht.

AND I WILL MAKE NATIONS OF THEE. The language of Rashi: “Israel and Edom are referred to here, for Ishmael was already born to him, and He could not therefore have been making any announcement concerning him.” But in my opinion it is not correct that He should inform him of Esau at the time of the covenant of circumcision since Esau does not observe circumcision and has not been commanded thereon, as the Sages expounded in Tractate Sanhedrin: (59b.) “For in Isaac shall seed be called to thee, (Further, 21:12.) but not all of Isaac.” (Not all of the children of Isaac, namely Jacob and Esau, but only “in” Isaac, meaning only one, Jacob.) Instead, [the proper interpretation is that] Israel alone is called “nations” and “peoples,” as in the verses: Yea, He loveth the peoples; (Deuteronomy 33:3.) They shall call peoples unto the mountains; (Ibid., Verse 19.) After thee, Benjamin, among the peoples. (Judges 5:14.) Even after the birth of all the tribes, He said: A nation and a company of nations shall be of thee; (Further, 35:11.) And I will make of thee a company of peoples. (Ibid., 48:4.)

Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov objects to this: From where do you draw this conclusion? Perhaps Jerusalem is different, as Jerusalem was also in the tribal land of Benjamin. Accordingly, it was shared by two tribes. Rather, Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said that proof that a tribe is characterized as a congregation is derived from another verse, as it is written that Jacob recounted what God said to him when he returned from Paddan: “And said to me: Behold, I will make you fruitful and multiply you, and I will make of you a congregation of peoples” (Genesis 48:4). Who was born to him from that time on? Only Benjamin. Conclude from it that this is what the Merciful One is saying to Jacob: Another congregation shall be now born to you. Apparently, one tribe is characterized as a congregation.

Rather, Rav Aḥa, son of Rabbi Ya’akov, said: The tribe of Levi is not characterized as a congregation, as it is written: “Behold, I will make you fruitful and multiply you, and I will make of you a congregation of peoples; and I will give this land to your descendants after you for an everlasting possession” (Genesis 48:4). It is derived from here that any tribe that has an ancestral possession bequeathed to it is characterized as a congregation, and any tribe that does not have an ancestral possession bequeathed to it is not characterized as a congregation. The tribe of Levi has no ancestral land, and the priests who are from the tribe of Levi have no ancestral land.

He said to me, Behold, I will make you fruitful and numerous, and I will make you into an assembly of nations [tribes]. I will give this land to your descendants after you for an everlasting possession.

And He said to me, Behold, I will increase thee and multiply thee, and make thee an assemblage of tribes, and will give this land to thy sons after thee for an everlasting inheritance.

ועתה, שני בניך וגו, “and now, as far as your two sons are concerned, etc.;” according to the Talmud in Baba Batra 123, the reason why Yaakov appointed both of Joseph’s sons as becoming founders of the twelve tribes, something he did not promise to any of his other sons, was because Joseph had sustained the whole family during the years of famine. Further more, Joseph had been the firstborn of Rachel who had been his principal wife, as opposed to the respective firstborn sons of Zilpah and Bilhah. Another explanation: Yaakov felt that this was one way he could honour the memory of Rachel versus the concubines by increasing the heritage of the sons of Rachel. Reuven had already forfeited his original claim to extra rights of the firstborn, having been guilty of a major indiscretion.

אפרים ומנשה כראובן ושמעון יהיו לי, “Ephrayim and Menashe shall be for me as possessing the same status as Reuven and Shimon.” It is notable that the numerical value of the words כראובן ושמעון יהיו לי, are identical to the numerical value of אפרים ומנשה [with a difference of only “1, the former amounting to “1” more.” Ed.]

ועתה שני בניך, "And now, your two sons, etc." As a result of this insight, ועתה, Jacob realised in retrospect that G'd had referred to two sons that were to be born to Joseph and that it was these that were destined to become גוי וקהל גוים as per that promise in 35,11. What G'd had meant was that Joseph's sons were to rank equally with Reuben and Shimon amongst Jacob's offspring.

כראובן ושמעון יהיו לי, “they will be for me just like Reuven and Shimon.” This verse shows that Yaakov transferred the birthright to Joseph. As to the verse in Chronicles I 5,1 “Reuven the first-born of Israel, but when he defiled his father’s bed his birthright was given to he sons of Joseph son of Israel but he is not to be reckoned as the first-born in genealogy.” Rashi holds that the transfer of the birthright did not include transfer of the right to inherit an extra portion of his father’s estate, but that only the honour due to the first-born was taken away from Reuven. Nachmanides rejects Rashi’s approach arguing that it is impossible to say that Joseph was given only part of the birthright, i.e. that he would be two of the twelve tribes without inheriting accordingly in the land of Israel. He quotes 49,22 as proof that Joseph became two tribes and uses the plural in the words יקראו בנחלתם, “they will be called such in their respective inheritances” as proof that Joseph’s birthright included the extra share of the inheritance. This is also in accordance with the translation of Onkelos who renders the words בנות צעדה עלי שור in 49,22 as תרין שבטין יפקון מבנוהי יקבלון חול'קא ואחסנתא as “two tribes from my sons will receive חולקא and אחסנתא” (different categories of land shares respectively).

עד בואי, I am not saying that all your sons will be treated as if they were literally my own sons; only Menashe and Ephrayim will enjoy this status.

ועתה שני בניך וגו', seeing that G’d has given me the land of Canaan as a possession, I can make you the firstborn with the right to receive two portions of that land. This means that in effect you will receive the share of two tribes. Your sons will receive an allocation equal to the combined allocation of Reuven and Shimon.

עד בואי, before I arrived. We had been informed in 41,3 that two sons had been born to Joseph before the onset of the famine, i.e. before Yaakov came to Egypt.

הנולדים לך עד באי אליך literally, WHO WERE BORN TO THEE . . . UNTIL I CAME TO THEE, i.e. before I came to thee. It signifies as much as: WHO WERE BORN from the time when you left me UNTIL THE TIME WHEN I CAME TO YOU. לי הם THEY SHALL BE MINE — they shall be counted amongst my other sons, to receive a portion in the Land each for himself (i.e. each to have his own territory exactly as each of my other sons has).

לי הם THEY SHALL BE MINE — they shall be counted amongst my other sons, to receive a portion in the Land each for himself (i.e. each to have his own territory exactly as each of my other sons has).

ועתה שני בניך הנולדים לך....לי הם, G’d gave me only these two sons of yours together with you. Yaakov had confirmed his meaning when he said that just as he had not expected to see Joseph again he had also not expected to live to see two of his sons. (verse 11)

לפני — before I came to you... [Rashi explains this] because עד בואי seemingly implies they were born after Yaakov came to him. But in 41:50 it is written, “Two sons were born to Yoseif before the years of famine came.” And when Yaakov came to Yoseif, two famine years had already passed. Thus Rashi explains, “Before I came...”

And now, based on the aforementioned promises, your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before my coming to you to Egypt, they are mine; I am adopting them as though they were my children. Ephraim and Manasseh, like Reuben and Simeon they shall be for me. Your first and second sons, my grandsons, will be elevated to equivalent status as that of my own first and second sons.

אפרים ומנשה כראובן ושמעון יהיה לי,” Ephrayim and Menashe will be to me just as Reuven and Shimon.” It appears from Rashi’s commentary that the division of the land in the days of Joshua was not based on the actual claimants, the sons of Yaakov still being alive at the time, but it was based on a principle known as גלגול, re-incarnation. It did not matter therefore, that Yaakov appeared to have compared the younger son Ephrayim, to Yaakov’s eldest, Reuven. Ephrayim and Menashe were to be “tribes” in name only, they did not replace the concept of “the tribe of Joseph.” [the cut off point for being included in the original family of Yaakov was the date of their arrival in the land of Egypt. Seeing that both Ephrayim and Menashe had been born prior to Yaakov’s arrival, even though they had been born on the contaminated soil of Egypt, enabled Yaakov to confer the status on them that he is about to bestow. Ed.] Nachmanides questions the wordsעל שם אחיהם יקראו בנחלתם, “they will be included under the names of their brothers in their inheritance,” claiming that these very words indicate that the “name” is of the essence, not as Rashi suggests that they were “tribes” in name only. Besides, Nachmanides holds that the land division under Joshua was not based on the original Israelites who had left Egypt being considered as having been resurrected, and the size of the land holdings being based on the size of their families at that time, but that each tribe received the same size of territory in the Land of Israel, although the parcels were not of equal quality as farmland, etc. When the Torah had instructed that the more numerous tribes should receive larger portions of land, whereas the less numerous ones would receive a smaller share, (Numbers 26,4) this referred to the basic family units within the tribe, not to the tribes themselves. These family units were based on the state of affairs of the families when they left Egypt. [if, due to the sin of the spies and the death decreed on that whole generation, taking possession of the land had not been postponed by 40 years, a whole generation, there would not have been a problem in understanding the instructions of the Torah. Ed.] It is therefore quite easy to understand that the tribal portions allocated to Ephrayim and Menashe by Yoshua equaled those of Reuven and Shimon.]

After having blessed the tribes that represented the priesthood and the monarchy, the tribe that is privileged to host the holy Temple in the future, is blessed next. The fact that Benjamin is G'ds beloved is testified to by that very fact, (verse 12) A major factor is that it was the only tribe wholly uninvolved in the struggle between Joseph and his brothers. Joseph who is the mainstay of the kingdom of the ten tribes, comes next. Since Ephrayim will be the leader of that kingdom, the abundance of blessings heaped on Joseph are partly to be viewed as applying to all the ten tribes, but they are identified with Joseph who had displayed moral fortitude in his encounter with the wife of Potiphar. The reference to Joseph as an ox, has been discussed in chapter thirty. Issachar and Zevulun are named next, being the remaining sons of Jacob's major wives Rachel and Leah. Also, they complete the camp of Yehudah. Zevulun is here mentioned ahead of Issachar though he was younger, in recognition of the fact that he assumed the burden of earning a livelihood for his brother Issachar so that the latter could devote himself to Torah study, (verse 18) The "tents” referred to, are the seclusion of the yeshivah, the Torah academy. Zevulun's maritime activities will be amply rewarded so that he can afford to entertain "nations." Gad's turn is next, since he too was considered a reward from G'd by his mother for having turned her handmaid over to Jacob as a wife. Also, he completes the camp of Reuben and the unnamed Shimon. The blessing marchiv Gad, who expands Gad, refers to the fact that it was this tribe that was the first to settle on the East Bank of the Jordan. It was also he who formed the vanguard when it came to fighting for possession of the West Bank. He considered the fact that Moses, Aaron and Miriam were all buried in his tribal territory, as a good omen for his choice of location, and an insurance of the tribe's future loyalty to G'd and Torah. Dan is head of the army group forming the rearguard. His being described as a hit and run expert, fits Samson the best known of his heroes. Naftali being senior to Asher, is mentioned next. Since the chronological order has not been observed in these blessings, Moses is anxious to conclude the blessings for the individual tribes with Asher, who is not only assured of an abundance of material wealth, but is assured that this will not cause jealousy among his brothers, i.e. "he will remain popular with his brothers." (verse 24) In this way the blessings applicable to the nation as a whole in verse twenty five, are an extension of the bounty promised to Asher. Just as at the beginning of the blessings, the line "may Reuben live and not die," refers to the wish that no sudden death should cut short his normal lifespan, so also at the end of the blessings Moses expresses the wish (verse 25) "and as your young days so shall be your old age," meaning that eventual death should come about only as the result of the natural process of aging. "Riding the heavens" (verse 26), is a symbol of the speed with which G'd may come to Israel's aid when needed. The prophecies of Moses, unlike those of Bileam, are not intended for the distant future. Bileam had spoken about "I can see it, but not now" etc.; not so Moses who describes G'd as "riding the clouds" to Israel's assistance as something in the immediate future. In order to be meaningful, victory must comprise four elements. 1) The victor should emerge unharmed. 2) The enemy must have been harmed. 3) The enemy must be seen to have been hurt. 4) Such hurt must be real, not merely superficial. Moses deals with these four aspects of victory in verse twenty nine. 1) "The shield of Your help." 2) "The sword of Your excellence." 3) "Your enemies will dwindle before you," and 4) "You will tread upon their heights." You will be seen to be enjoying the fruits of victory.

From the aspect of this lack which is inherent in the creation were born these four empires, who took royalty/kingship/dominion from Yisrael. As this nation [Yisrael] was created for the Glory of Hashem, as it's written: (Isiah 43:21) "This nation I created to speak of my praise". These four empires that inherited rulership from Yisrael detract from the glory of Hashem in the this lower world. For even if one is to find something within them which augments the honor of Hashem's name, as we will explain, for [as people say to a hornet] neither any of your stingers nor any of your honey does Hashem desire, for the essence of his Glory is when Hashem is One in his world and there is none beside him, and this particularly the other nations diminish. No nation was created for this with the exception of Yisrael, for they also are one, as is hinted at in the verse: (Isiah 43,21) "This nation I created to speak of my praise". For in this verse is the phrase "This Nation" ["עם "זו], and the Gematria of the word זו is 13, which is the also the Gematria of the word One [אחד]. For Yisrael are 13 tribes including the tribe of Levi, for Ephraim and Menashe are two (Of the twelve brothers, Yosef is split into his two sons which makes 13). And thus, we find a parallel between the word One [אחד] and the tribes. The Tribe of Levi is a singular tribe and separated from all the other tribes, and it a tribe unto itself, and it is represented by the א [Aleph] in the word אחד [One], for א represents singularity [as the Gematria of Aleph is 1]. And the ח [Chet] corresponds to the children of the Foremother [Rachel and Leah] for they are eight outside of Levi [Reuven, Shimon, Yehuda, Issaschar, Zvulin, Binyamin, Ephriam, Menashe] and this is hinted at in the ח of אחד. The other 4 [ד] are the children of the maidservants [Billah and Zilpah who gave birth to Gad, Asher, Dan, and Naftali]. There the verse says "This Nation" ["עם "זו] to allude to the Oneness of Yisrael, "they will speak of my praise" the essential praise here is that Hashem should be One with nothing besides. This [the number of tribes] is not accidental but purposefully done by Hashem from the outset of creation, for this nation [Yisrael] testifies that Hashem is One, as it is said in the Midrash that Yisrael testify about Hashem that he is One. We don't have room to expand on this idea here. But the four empires nullify the unity of God in the world, for the take rulership from Yisrael, and they [Yisrael] testify on the Unity of Hashem. Therefore, at the end of the four empires, when Kingship/Royalty will return to Yisrael, the following is written (Obadiah 1:21): "For liberators shall march up on Mount Zion to wreak judgment on Mount Esau; and dominion shall be the LORD’s." and in (Zecharia 14,9) "Hashem will be King over all the world - on that day Hashem will be One and His Name will be One." And this is as we have said, that the empires are four and this number represents a deviation from Unity. For a central point which has no sides and is singular is One, as is known, and it is impossible that there could be two corresponding to a center, for a center is one and one alone. And the directions are divergent, for this one stretches to the East, and this one the opposite direction to the West, and this to the South and this to the North. If you think deeply you will realize that these four directions are definitionally divergent, and therefore they are the antithesis of Unity. As such, Yisrael is concealed in a hint in the verse at the beginning of creation: " בראשית". [This word, the first in the Torah, classically translated as "in the beginning" is deeply problematic from a grammatical standpoint. The Maharal quotes Rashi quoting the Midrash on how to resolve this conflict with a different translation]. For the sake of Yisrael was the world created! They are the primary dependent entity created by Hashem, and therefore it is appropriate that they be hinted to at the beginning of creation. A similar idea is seen in the hinting of the four empires, which is a result of a definitional lack found in the creation through its inherent lack of being created [as we have at length seen above].

[2] "And another explanation: Ephraim is a dear son to me. As it says (Hosea 11:3), "I taught Ephraim to walk." The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "I carried him and held him by his arms. When Jacob took him between his arms, as it is said (Genesis 48:13), "And Joseph took them both." Now what is written afterwards (Genesis 48:8)? "And Israel saw Joseph's sons, and said, 'Who are these?'" What did Jacob see that he asked, "Who are these?" He already knew them, as it is said (Genesis 48:5), "And now your two sons." Rather, our father Jacob foresaw that a descendant of Ephraim, namely Jeroboam son of Nebat the Ephraimite, would make two golden calves, as it is said (1 Kings 11:26), "And Jeroboam son of Nebat, an Ephraimite, took his stand." He would then say (1 Kings 12:28), "These are your gods, O Israel." Therefore, Jacob said, "Who are these?" And Joseph replied (Genesis 48:9), "These are my sons." What did Joseph do? He removed his crown from his head and released his belt (or "girdle") before Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 48:12), "And Joseph took them both." He said to him, "Do you see what sins they will commit?" Jacob answered, "I do not." Once he heard this, Joseph said to him (Genesis 48:9), "Bring them to me and I will bless them." Immediately Joseph took them both (Genesis 48:13), and Israel stretched out his right hand. When Joseph saw this, he was displeased, as it is said (Genesis 48:17), "And Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand." He said to him, "Do you think that I have no strength left in my old age? By your life, I still have as much strength as they do." But his father refused (Genesis 48:19)." "And from Menasheh fell [to] David, etc. (I Chronicles 12:20). However, his brother etc. (Genesis 48:19), this is Yehoshua who stands from Ephraim, as it says, "from the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea, son of Nun" (Numbers 13:8), who erected the wall, and all the nations of the world look and see. Therefore, "and his seed shall become a multitude of nations" (Genesis 48:19). The Holy One Blessed be He said, "I have seen how good Ephraim is; take them on my arms" (Hosea 11:3). When The Holy One Blessed be He said said, "Bring them to me" (Genesis 48:9), I was there and revealed a mystery to Jacob about Ephraim and Jeroboam, although they did not know that I had healed them (Hosea 11:3). Ephraim, the beloved son, is dear to me.

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:55). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]…” – do not read it as kaarat, but rather as akart, corresponding to Jacob, who extracted [akar] the birthright (The birthright refers to the extra portion of the inheritance that the eldest son received.) from Reuben and gave it to Joseph: “I have given you one portion more than your brothers…” (Genesis 48:22). “Silver” – just as it says: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20), just as he (Silver alludes to the statement made by Jacob, who was righteous.) said: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be for me like Reuben and Simeon” (Genesis 48:5). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – when Jacob descended to Egypt on account of Joseph, he was one hundred and thirty years old, as it is stated: “Jacob said to Pharaoh: The days of the years of my residence are one hundred and thirty years” (Genesis 47:9). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – corresponding to Joseph, who was cast [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “Silver” – after: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20) – what he said to his father (Silver alludes to the statement made by Joseph, who was righteous.) : “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn; place your right hand upon his head” (Genesis 48:18). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel” – as it was through him that seventy people descended to Egypt. “Both of them full…” – Jacob and Joseph, both of them were full-fledged righteous men and both produced tribes. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:56). “One gold ladle of ten shekels…” – corresponding to the ten districts of Manasseh, as it is stated: “Ten districts fell to Manasseh” (Joshua 17:5). “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:57). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:58). “One young bull, one ram [one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering]; one goat…” – these (This is a reference to the three burnt offerings.) are three corresponding to the three generations that Joseph saw from Manasseh that received a portion in the land, (This is a reference to the fact that there were three major families named after the three generations following Manasseh, in addition to the family which was named after Manasseh himself. Therefore, the phrase “the sons of Makhir” refers to Makhir himself, Gilad, and Iezer.) as it is stated: “The children of Makhir son of Manasseh, too, were born at Joseph’s knees” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise, it says: “The sons of Manasseh: For Makhir, the family of the Makhirites, and Makhir begot Gilad.… These are the sons of Gilad: Of Iezer…” (Numbers 26:29–30). Makhir, Gilad, and Iezer – these are three generations that were patrilineal houses that were attributed to Joseph, as Manasseh is attributed to Jacob, just as it says: “And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before my coming to you to Egypt, they are mine” (Genesis 48:5). The fourth, this was Ya’ir son of Manasseh, who received a portion in the land, just as it says: “Ya’ir son of Manasseh went and captured their villages [ḥavot], and he called them Ḥavot Ya’ir” (Numbers 32:41). The three species of burnt offerings corresponded to the sons of Makhir son of Manasseh. (This is referring to what was mentioned above, and is mentioned again since the midrash now also explains what the sin offering signifies.) The goat sin offering corresponded to Ya’ir, who did not bequeath his portion to his sons, because he did not have sons. That is why he called them (The villages.) by his name, because he did not have any remnant, and the sons of his brother Makhir inherited his portion. “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Gamliel son of Pedatzur” (Numbers 7:59). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the tribe of Manasseh, which split into two and received two portions in the land, half of it on the east bank of the Jordan and half in the land of Canaan. “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these are three species, corresponding to three things that Joseph did on behalf of Manasseh, whom he sought to elevate over his brother Ephraim. The first: “Joseph took the two of them, Ephraim in his right hand to the left of Israel, and Manasseh in his left hand to the right of Israel” (Genesis 48:13). The second: “He supported his father’s hand, to remove it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh” (Genesis 48:17). The third: “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn…” (Genesis 48:18). Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five women from the tribe of Manasseh who took a portion in the land. These were Tzelofḥad’s five daughters, just as it says: “Tzelofḥad’s daughters speak justly; give them a holding for inheritance…” (Numbers 27:7). They were five, as it is stated: “These are the names of his daughters: Maḥla, Noa, Ḥogla, Milka, and Tirtza” (Numbers 27:1). Likewise, Jacob mentioned them in the blessing of Joseph, as it is stated: “Branches [banot] ran atop the wall [alei shur]” (Genesis 49:22); these are Tzelofḥad’s daughters [banot], who received a portion in the land. Alternatively, why were they five each? It corresponds to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “May they proliferate like fish in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16), and fish were created on the fifth day. “This was the offering of Gamliel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Gamliel…”

“This stone that I have established as a monument will be the House of God and everything that You will give me I will tithe to You” (Genesis 28:22). “This stone that I have established as a monument will be the House of God and everything that You will give me I will tithe to You.” One idolater asked Rabbi Meir, he said to him: ‘The first issue of your donkey, with what is it redeemed?’ He said to him: ‘With a lamb, as it is written: “The first issue of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb [seh]”’ (Exodus 34:20). He said to him: ‘If he does not have a lamb?’ He said to him: ‘With a goat.’ He said to him: ‘From where do you derive this?’ He said to him: ‘It is as it is written: “You shall take it from the sheep or from the goats”’ (Exodus 12:5). He said to him: ‘That is for the paschal lamb.’ He said to him: ‘A goat is also called seh.’ [He said:] ‘From where do you derive this?’ He said to him: ‘“These are the animals that you may eat: An ox, a sheep [seh khevasim], and a goat [seh izim]”’ (Deuteronomy 14:4). He stood and kissed him on his head. Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: A certain Samaritan asked Rabbi Meir, he said to him: ‘Do you not say that Jacob is truthful, as the verse says “Give truth to Jacob”?’ (Micah 7:20). He said to him: ‘Yes.’ He said to him: ‘But did he not say: “Everything that You will give me I will tithe to You”?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ He said to him: ‘He separated the tribe of Levi as a tithe. Why did he not separate one from the other two tribes?’ (There were twelve tribes. One tenth of twelve would be 1.2 tribes, but Jacob set aside only one tribe, which is a tenth of ten, and not a tenth of twelve.) He said to him: ‘Were they twelve? Were they not fourteen? “Ephraim and Manasseh will be for me like Reuben and Simeon”’ (Genesis 48:5). He said to him: ‘All the more so – if you add water, add flour.’ (If you add more tribes, you should increase the tithe.) He said to him: ‘Do you not concede to me that there were four matriarchs? The firstborn is sacred, and sacred does not produce sacred.’ (Deduct one tribe for the firstborn of each of the matriarchs; therefore, tithes need be taken only from ten.) He said to him: ‘Happy are you, and happy is your nation, that you are found in its midst.’

“God said to him: I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and an assembly of nations will be from you, and kings will emerge from your loins” (Genesis 35:11). “God said to him: I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply” – Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Yitzḥak: I used to say: Reuben was already out. Simeon was already out. Benjamin had already emerged from his loins and was still in his mother’s womb. (He used to wonder who this blessing referred to, given that Jacob’s sons were all born except for Benjamin, and Rachel was already pregnant with him, such that he had already emerged from Jacob’s loins. ) Then I said: “A nation” – this is Benjamin; “and an assembly of nations” – this is Manasseh and Ephraim, as it is written: “His descendants will be a plenitude of the nations” (Genesis 48:19). Rabbi Berekhya, Rabbi Ḥelbo, and Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman: “And kings will emerge from your loins” – this is Yerovam and Yehu. The Rabbis say: Is it possible that Avner was a righteous man and he disputed that the kingdom [belonged to] the house of David? It is that he expounded a midrash, and crowned Ish Boshet. (See II Samuel 2:8–9. ) That is what is written: “And kings will emerge from your loins” – this is Saul and Ish Boshet. What did they see that led them to draw near and ostracize in the case of the concubine in Giva? (See Judges chap. 20–21. ) It is, rather, that they read a verse and ostracized them, and read a verse and immediately welcomed them. They read a verse and ostracized them: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be like Reuben and Simeon for me” (Genesis 48:5). (They felt justified in ostracizing the tribe of Benjamin because Manasseh and Ephraim counted as two tribes, such that there would be twelve tribes even without Benjamin. ) They read a verse and welcomed them: “A nation and an assembly of nations will be from you.” (As stated above, this refers to Benjamin as well as Manasseh and Ephraim, and therefore they welcomed Benjamin back and cancelled his ostracization. )

Rabbi Ze’eira began: “My lyre is for mourning, and my flute is for the voice of weepers” (Job 30:31). There it is taught: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: There were no days as joyous for Israel as the fifteenth of Av and as Yom Kippur, on which the daughters of Jerusalem would go out in white borrowed garments so as not to embarrass one who did not have one. All the garments require immersion. The daughters of Israel would go out in them and dance in the vineyards. (Mishna Taanit 4:8.) It is taught: One who did not have a wife would turn to there. What would they say? ‘Young man, lift your eyes and see what you are choosing for yourself. Do not look at beauty, look at lineage.’ Likewise it says: “Emerge, daughters of Zion, and gaze at King Solomon, at the crown with which his mother crowned him on the day of his wedding, and on the day of the rejoicing of his heart” (Song of Songs 3:11). “The day of his wedding” – this is the giving of the Torah. “The day of the rejoicing of his heart” – this is the building of the Temple, may it be built speedily in our days. Granted Yom Kippur, as it is a day of pardon and forgiveness for Israel, the day on which the last tablets were given. However, what is the fifteenth of Av? Rabbi Yaakov bar Aḥa said in the name of Rabbi Asi: It is the ideal time for chopping trees, as all the trees chopped on it do not produce a worm, and it is taught: Any wood in which a worm is found is disqualified from being atop the altar. (Mishna Midot 2:5.) Rabbi Abba bar Kahana and Rabbi Asi said in the name of Ulla in the name of Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi]: It was then that Hoshea ben Ela canceled the sentries that Yerovam ben Nevat had deployed on the roads. (Yerovam, king of Israel, appointed sentries to prevent the residents of his kingdom from ascending to Jerusalem for the pilgrimage festivals.) Rav Kahana asked before Rav: Is it possible that he did all this good and it is written in his regard: “Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, ascended against him, [and Hoshea became his servant]” (II Kings 17:3)? Rather, it is because he removed the collar from his neck and placed it on the neck of the masses, and he did not say: All the people should ascend and pray, but rather, anyone who wishes to ascend let him ascend. (Hoshea was punished, and the rest of his kingdom was punished as well (see II Kings 17:6), because he did not encourage them to ascend to Jerusalem and most of the people did not actually ascend. Previously it had been the king’s fault that the people did not ascend, as they could not go because of the sentries; subsequently it was the people’s fault, and therefore the entire kingdom was punished.) Rabbi Shmuel bat Naḥmani [said], and some say it in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak: [The fifteenth of Av is] the day the tribes were permitted to enter into marriage with one another, as it is stated: “And every daughter who inherits an inheritance [from the tribes of the children of Israel shall be a wife to one of the family of the tribe of her father]” (Numbers 36:8), and it is written: “And no inheritance shall pass from tribe to another tribe…” (Numbers 36:9). Is it possible for a daughter to inherit [from] two tribes? Rather, say on this basis, her father was from one tribe and her mother from another tribe. (The verse refers to a daughter who inherits “from the tribes of the children of Israel,” implying that her parents were from different tribes. But then the verse goes on to state that a woman cannot marry a man from a different tribe. The Sages understood this to mean that it was only in the first generation when Israel entered the land that women could not marry men from other tribes. The date when it was officially determined that from then on it was permissible was the fifteenth of Av.) The Rabbis said: [It is] the day the tribe of Benjamin was permitted to enter the congregation, as it is written: “Cursed is one who gives a woman to Benjamin” (Judges 21:18). Rabbi Yoḥanan said: They read a verse and drew them near, they read a verse and distanced them. They read a verse and drew them near: “A nation and an assembly of nations shall be from you” (Genesis 35:11). (When God promised this to Jacob, Benjamin had not yet been born, meaning that it was necessary to ensure that Benjamin would procreate.) They read a verse and distanced them: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be like Reuben and Simeon for me” (Genesis 48:5) – as they are not considered with their brothers. (The total of twelve tribes could be achieved without Benjamin, with the addition of Ephraim and Manasseh.) Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: It was the day that the tribes were permitted [to marry each other]. Rav Matna said: It was the day that the slain of Beitar were allowed to be buried. Rabbi Eliezer the Great said: It is reasonable on the fifteenth; from that point on, the intensity of the sun wanes and they would no longer chop wood for the arrangement. Rabbi Menasya said: They called it the day of the breaking of the scythe. From that point on: One who adds, adds, and one who does not add, will be gathered. (From this point on, the nights begin to be lengthy. Since night is a good time for Torah study, the midrash states that years of life will be added for one who adds to his hours of Torah study. One who does not will die young.) Rabbi Avin and Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is the day that the digging for those who died in the wilderness was halted. Rabbi Levi said: Every eve of the ninth of Av, Moses would dispatch a herald to the entire camp, saying: ‘Go out and dig,’ and they would go out and dig graves and sleep in them. In the morning, he would dispatch a herald saying: ‘Rise and separate the dead from the living,’ and they would stand and take themselves out. Fifteen thousand and more were subtracted, (Each year) for a total of six hundred thousand. In the fortieth year, the last one, they did so and found themselves intact. They said: It appears that we were mistaken in our calculation, and they did the same on the tenth, the eleventh, the twelfth, the thirteenth, and the fourteenth. When the moon was full, they said: It appears that the Holy One blessed be He abrogated the decree from upon us, and they then rendered it a holiday. But due to their iniquities, mourning beset this world with the destruction of the Temple twice. That is what is written: “My lyre is for mourning, and my flute is for the voice of weepers” (Job 30:31). “The people wept that night” (Numbers 14:1) – when they were exiled, Jeremiah began lamenting over them: “How does…sit solitary?” (Lamentations 1:1).

A certain Cuthean (i.e., a Samaritan) came and questioned R. Meir. He said to him: Do you not say that indeed your ancestor Jacob is truthful, since it is written (in Micah 7:20): YOU GIVE TRUTHFULNESS TO JACOB …? said to him: He separated out the tribe of Levi for the tribes, one out of ten. Should he not have separated out from two more ? He said to him: You have said that there were twelve, but I say that there were fourteen, as stated (in Gen. 48:5): EPHRAIM AND MANASSEH SHALL BE MINE LIKE REUBEN AND SIMEON. He said to him: So here there is support for it. You have added standing grain. Have you added water? He said to him: Do you not admit that there are four matriarchs? [Take away from them the four firstborn (of Jacob's four wives),] since the firstborn is not tithed. Why? Because he is holy, and something holy does not redeem for use something holy. He said to him: It is good for your people that you are among them. (Prov. 6:20:) AND DO NOT FORSAKE THE TORAH OF YOUR MOTHER (immekha), your people (ummatekha). That is what David said (in Ps. 40:9 [8]): TO CARRY OUT YOUR WILL, MY GOD, IS MY DESIRE, . R. Aha [bar Ulla] said: Is there Torah within the belly? And is it not so written (in Jer. 31:33): AND UPON THEIR HEART (not their belly) I WILL WRITE IT? It is simply that David said: May a curse come upon me, if something goes down into my belly, except when it is tithed. This is what is written (in I Chron. 27:25): AND OVER THE TREASURIES OF THE KING WAS AZMAVETH BEN {AZRIEL} [ADIEL]. AND OVER THE TREASURIES IN THE COUNTRY, {IN THE VINEYARDS, IN THE MOUNTAINS,} [IN THE CITIES, IN THE VILLAGES,] AND IN THE TOWERS WAS {JOHANAN} [JONATHAN] BEN UZZIAH. (In other words, David was concerned enough about tithes to appoint overseers.) For that reason Moses warned Israel (in Deut. 14:22): YOU SHALL SURELY TITHE.

Another interpretation (of Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH. < The interpretation is > that Jacob's face was like Joseph's. (As Rashi informs us (ad loc.), the midrash needs to explain why Jacob’s generations are being ascribed to Joseph. Cf. Gen. R. 84:6, which argues that one should expect any discussion of Jacob’s children to begin with Reuben.) Where is it shown? Where it says so (in Gen. 37:3): NOW ISRAEL LOVED JOSEPH [MORE THAN ALL HIS SONS BECAUSE HE WAS THE CHILD OF HIS OLD AGE. But look, Benjamin was younger than < Joseph >; yet it says: < Joseph was > THE CHILD OF HIS OLD AGE. It is simply that he had features (Gk.: eikonion.) which resembled him. Ergo (in Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH]. Just as Jacob raised up tribes; so did Joseph raise up tribes. It is so stated (in Gen. 48:5): EPHRAIM AND MANASSEH SHALL BE MINE LIKE REUBEN AND SIMEON. Ergo (in Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH.

Another explanation (of Deut. 14:22), “You shall tithe, tithe.” This is related to the verse (in Is. 24:5), “And the earth was distorted under its inhabitants, because they transgressed Torahs; (Torot. Such a literal translation is required by the midrash. In the biblical context the word denotes something more general, such as teachings.) they violated a statute; [they broke an eternal covenant].” R. Isaac said, “You have already been false to it, and [so] it is distorted for you. It [may] show you standing grain, but it does not show you a shock of sheaves. It [may] show you [a shock of sheaves, but it does not show you a threshing floor]. It [may] show you a threshing floor, but it does not show you a winnowed heap. Why [not]? (Ibid.:) ‘Because they transgressed Torahs; they violated statutes,’ in that they did transgress two Torahs, the written Torah and the oral Torah; (ibid.) ‘they violated a statute,’ the statute of tithes; (ibid.) ‘they broke an eternal covenant,’ an ancestral covenant.” For that reason Moses warned Israel (in Deut. 14:22), “You shall surely tithe.” (Prov. 6:20:) “My child, keep your father's commandments, [and do not forsake the Torah of your mother].” R. Huna said, “Our earliest ancestors separated out terumot and tithes.” Abraham separated out the great terumah, as stated (in Gen. 14:22), “[Then Abram said unto the king of Sodom,] ‘I have lifted up my hand unto the Lord, God most high.’” A lifting up is nothing but a terumah (rt.: rwm), as you say (in Numb. 18:26), “[Now you shall speak unto the Levites and say unto them, ‘When you receive tithes from the Children of Israel, the tithe that I have given you as your portion,] you shall lift (rt.: rwm) out of it a terumah of the Lord, [a tithe from the tithe].’” Isaac separated out the second tithe, as stated (in Gen. 26:12), “So Isaac sowed on that land and reaped in that year a hundredfold, [for the Lord had blessed him]”; R. Eiba bar Kahana said, “Is it not true that a blessing does not rest on what is measured, on what is weighed, or on what is counted? So why did he measure them? In order to tithe them. This is what is written (ibid.), ‘for the Lord had blessed him.’” (See Deut. 14:24, which mentions a blessing in the context of the second tithe; therefore, perhaps the blessing of Gen. 26:12 would have been the result of Isaac’s second tithe.) Jacob separated out the first tithe, as stated (in Gen. 28:22), “and of all that You give me, I will surely set aside a tithe for You.” A certain Cuthean (i.e., a Samaritan) came and questioned R. Meir. He said to him, “Do you not say that indeed your ancestor Jacob is truthful?” He said [back] to him, “Yes, as it is written (in Micah 7:20), ‘You give truthfulness to Jacob.’” [The Cuthean] said to him, “He separated out the tribe of Levi [as a tithe] for the tribes, [i.e.,] one out of ten. Should he not have separated out [a tithe] from two more [tribes]?” R. Meir said to him, “You have said that there were twelve, but I say that there were fourteen, as stated (in Gen. 48:5), ‘Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine like Reuben and Simeon.’” He said to him, “So here you are supporting me. You have added flour. Have you added water?” He said to him, “Do you not admit that there are four matriarchs that had four first-borns? Take away from [the fourteen] the four firstborn (of Jacob's four wives), since the firstborn is not tithed. Why? Because he is holy, and something holy does not redeem for use something [else that is] holy.” He said to him, ‘It is good for your people that you are among them.” Hence it is written (Prov. 6:20), “and do not forsake the Torah of your mother (immekha),” [i.e.,] your people (ummatekha). That is what David said (in Ps. 40:9), “To carry out Your will, my God, is my desire, [for Your Torah is within my belly].” R. Aha bar Ulla said, “Is there Torah within the belly? And is it not so written (in Jer. 31:33), ‘and upon their heart (not their belly) I will write it?’ It is simply that David said, ‘May [a curse] come upon me, if something goes down into my belly, except when it is tithed.’ This is what is written (in I Chron. 27:25), ‘And over the treasuries of the king was Azmaveth ben Adiel; and over the treasuries in the country in the cities, in the villages, and in the towers was Jonathan ben Uzziah.’” (In other words, David was concerned enough about tithes to appoint overseers.) For that reason Moses warned Israel (in Deut. 14:22), “You shall surely tithe.”

R. Yohanan said: Where there actually only twelve tribes? Does it not say: Ephraim and Manasseh shall be like Reuben and Simeon (Gen. 48:5), making fourteen in all? The answer is that when Levi is counted among the tribes, they are not counted, and when Levi is not counted among the tribes, Ephraim and Manasseh are reckoned as one tribe. How do we know this It is written: Of the children of Joseph: of Ephraim, Elishama the son of Manasseh … Gamaliel (Num. 1:10). Hence, all these are the twelve tribes—no more and no less.

The sons of a man's sons are like his own sons. Whence do we learn (this)? From Jacob, because it is said, "Ephraim and Manasseh, even as Reuben and Simeon, shall be mine" (Gen. 48:5). Were they his sons? Were they not the sons of his son? But it teaches thee that the sons of a man's sons are as his own sons. And the sons of one's daughters are as one's own sons. Whence do we learn (this)? From Laban, because it is said, "And Laban answered and said unto Jacob, The daughters are my daughters, and the sons are my sons" (Gen. 31:43). Were they then his sons? Were they not the sons of his daughters? But it teaches thee that the sons of a man's daughters are like his own sons.

Rabbi Elazar, son of 'Arakh, said to them: The Holy One, blessed be He, said this to Abraham only at the hour when he had seed, as it is said, "Thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs" (ibid.). From the time when Isaac was born until Israel went forth from Egypt 400 years (elapsed). (Rabban Jochanan, son of Ẓakkai) said to him: Verily it is written, "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, which they sojourned in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years" (Ex. 12:40). He answered him, saying: 210 years Israel abode in Egypt, and five years before Jacob came to Egypt there were born unto Joseph(the fathers of) two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim, and they belonged to the Israelites. Behold, (we have) 215 years of days and nights, (this equals) 430 years; for the Holy One, blessed be He, reduced the time for the sake of the merit of the Patriarchs, for they are the mountains of the world, and for the sake of the merit of the Mothers, for they are the hills of the world, and concerning them the Scripture says, "The voice of my beloved ! Behold, he cometh, leaping upon the mountains, skipping over the hills" (Cant. 2:8).

One who takes a vow not to derive benefit from those that are born [yeludim] is permitted to derive benefit from those who will be born [noladim] after the time of the vow. But if one takes a vow not to derive benefit from those who will be born, he is also prohibited from deriving benefit from those that are already born at the time of the vow. Rabbi Meir permits deriving benefit even from those that are already born at the time of the vow because he holds that the one taking the vow was precise in prohibiting only those that will be born. And the Rabbis say: He intended to include with this expression only one whose nature is to be born. Therefore, both those who will be born and those who were already born are included in the vow.

Something similar is true of Joseph. Although Joseph himself is a branch of Jacob, he did father two of the regular tribes, i.e. Ephrayim and Menasseh, whom Jacob compared in status to Reuben and Shimon (Genesis 48, 5). When we look once more at the word אחד, we will find that Joseph was unique in having a close connection with both the letter ח i.e. the brothers of Jacob's major wives, seeing he himself was one of those. He was also closely attached to the sons of Jacob's concubines, since the Torah describes Joseph as being raised primarily among the sons of Zilpah and Bilhah (37, 2). Considering the expression והוא נער, also stressed in that verse, we find in it an allusion to something I have previously mentioned, namely that יעקב contains an allusion to the letter ו in the four-lettered Ineffable Name. The name יוסף must then be viewed as a miniature edition of that same letter in G–d's name. The scriptural allusion to this concept is found in Isaiah 10, 19 ונער יכתבם, "and a lad will write them down." [This is probably an error, and should have been a quote from Isaiah 11, 6 ונער קטן נוהג בם. Ed.]

We say in Tractate Tamid, "Who is wise? The one who see the nolad (i.e., who has foresight)." And it doesn't say, "the one who sees the future to come." And we use the language of "nolad" (lit. "that which was born"), for King Solomon, of blessed memory, said, "The lazy man says, 'There’s a lion in the street; I shall be killed if I step outside,'" for these words are the lazy one who buries his hands in the bowl" and is paranoid due to imaginary events which have never transpired. Therefore, it doesn't say, "Who is wise? The one who sees the future" -- because all foolish and lazy ones worry very much about vapor/vanity. But the wise one is the one who infers the future based on past events -- he is the wise. And behold the Sages said, "ha-nolad" (lit. "that which was born), i.e., from all those things which were born, which implies that these things were already born, as is written (Genesis 41:50), "two sons" - who were born to you, "before [the famine] came to you" - this also implies that this would happen (lit. be born) in the future, as it written, behold, "a son shall be born to the house of David, Josiah by name." Therefore we say in our mishnah, "Who is wise? The one who see the nolad (i.e. they have foresight)" from [that which] already happened in early days, and from similar events, and they see the future to be born from that which is happening now, and this is to say, the "nolad" which includes that which has already happened and that which will happen in the future. And, therefore, one should not find guilt in Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas because until this moment, it was unprecedented - that a Jewish individual would be so embittered to the extent that they'd hand over the Temple and all of Israel into the hands of the non-Jewish oppressors, and Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas had no reason to worry about this, but from then onwards, when an event like this has already happened, we say about all similar incidents, "Happy is the one who fears always."

Because of these substantive and linguistic parallels, the attentive reader cannot but hear in the law in Parashat Ki Tetzeh a retrospective commentary on Jacob’s conduct vis-à-vis his own sons. Yet that conduct seems to have been the opposite of what is legislated here. Jacob did transfer the right of the firstborn from Reuben, his actual firstborn, son of the less-loved Leah, to Joseph, the firstborn of his beloved Rachel. This is what he told Joseph: “Now, the two sons who were born to you in Egypt before I came here shall be considered as mine. Ephraim and Menashe shall be just like Reuben and Simeon to me” (Gen. 48:5).

geboren werden. Die Form נולדים bedeutet zwar in der Bibel sowohl Geborene, s. Gen. 48, 5, als auch solche, die erst geboren werden sollen, s. I Kön. 13, 2; in der Volkssprache jedoch bedeutet נולדים in der Regel diejenigen, die erst geboren werden sollen, bei Gelübden aber ist die übliche Audrucksweise massgebend.

Now, your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, shall be mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine no less than Reuben and Simeon. (Gen. 48:5)

ואת המשכן תעשה עשר יריעות, "And you shall construct the Tabernacle out of ten strips of cloth, etc. This number is an allusion to the ten directives G'd used when creating the universe. The Torah wants to tell us that construction of the Tabernacle was as important to G'd as creation of the universe itself. Constructing the Tabernacle would also confer as much merit on the Israelites as if they had personally brought about the creation of the universe which was created by means of ten directives.

There are still other considerations behind the requirement to use such materials as twisted linen of specific colours, goats' hair, etc. It is not accidental that G'd commanded ten strips of cloth to be made of linen whereas He commanded eleven strips of cloth made of goats' hair (verse 7) to be constructed and to be placed on top of the ten inner strips of cloth. Also the commandment to join five each of the linen strips of cloth together to form one unit, or in the case of the strips of cloth made of goats' hair, to combine two units of five or six strips together, this too was not arbitrary. The reason for all this was that G'd thereby symbolically impressed the three basic letters of His Ineffable Name on these four sections of strips of cloth joined in units of 10+5+6. (י+ה+ו). G'd commanded that all of these strips of cloth be four cubits wide, regardless of whether they were made of linen or of goats' hair. The number four symbolises that G'd's name contains four letters. You will find that our sages in Shabbat 6 state that a minimum of 4 handbreadths square and ten handbreadths height is required to qualify as a private domain. This is an allusion to the four letters in the Ineffable Name of G'd adding up to the number 26. Similarly, 4 by 4 plus 10 adds up to 26, i.e י+ה+ו+ה. Seeing that the letter י is relatively holier than the other letters in G'd's name, the unit of ten strips of cloth made of linen formed the inner cover of the Tabernacle, being closest to (directly exposed to) the Holy Ark. The reason the strips had to be joined in units of five is an allusion to the thought that the first letter ה in G'd's name is always associated with the letter י. This is part of the mystique of the reading of the letter י. When you read (look at the spelling of) that letter as if it were a word, i.e. י־ו־ד, you are combining the י with the letters ו and ד, which between them make up the shape of the letter ה, although you actually read only a single letter. This is part of the mystical dimension חכמה and some of these mystical apects are alluded to in the details of the coverings of the Tabernacle. The first two letters of the word חכמה add up to 28, corresponding to the length of these various strips of cloth the Torah commands as coverings for the Tabernacle. The third letter of the word חכמה, i.e. the letter מ whose numerical value is 40, is represented by the width of 40 cubits which the two units of linen strips amount to when joined together width-wise. The fourth letter in the word חכמה, i.e. the letter ה, equals 5, which is represented by the fact that 5 such strips of cloth had to be sewn together into a unit. It also alludes to the five different kinds of kind deeds that derive from the emanation חכמה. Subsequently, G'd commanded the making of eleven strips of cloth out of goats' hair, their number (11) to complete the name of G'd, i.e. ו־ה. They were to be divided into units of five and six respectively to form an allusion to these two letters in the latter half of G'd's Ineffable Name. The combined width of these eleven strips of cloth of goats' hair, i.e. 44 cubits, are an allusion to the mystical dimension of the spelling of the Ineffable Name as words, i.e. יוד־הא־ואו־הא. When you spell the name in this fashion you obtain a total of 45. (We have already explained on Genesis 48,5 that a discrepancy of a single digit when working with numerical values is compensated for by either adding or subtracting the entire word as required in order to make up this digit, i.e. 44 plus or minus the word serving as basis of the gematria.

A Midrashic approach found in Tanchuma Bamidbar 12: the reason the Torah speaks of איש על דגלו באותות, is that Yaakov had already told each of his sons what would be inscribed on their respective banners. He had commanded them that when he died none of the Egyptians and none of his grandchildren should touch his bier, seeing that among the latter there was someone of Canaanitic descent. This is the meaning of Genesis 50,12-13: “his sons did just as he had commanded them; his sons carried him all the way up to the land of Canaan.” The reason that the Torah twice wrote the line “his sons, etc.,” is to inform us that only his sons and no one else participated in carrying the casket in which Yaakov was being transported. He had instructed them that Yehudah, Issachar, and Zevulun were to support the eastern side of the casket, that Reuven, Shimon, and Gad were to support the southern side of the casket. Ephrayim, Menashe, and Binyamin were to carry the western side of the casket, whereas Dan, Asher, and Naftali were to carry the northern end of it. Joseph was not to carry any part of it seeing he was a king. Levi was not to carry any part of it seeing he was slated to carry the Holy Ark. It would not be appropriate that someone who would carry the Holy Ark should defile himself by carrying a casket. [Ephrayim and Menashe, though technically grandchildren, had been described by their grandfather as “like Reuven and Shimon,” i.e. as children (compare Genesis 48,5). Ed.] Yaakov had said that “if you will carry my casket in accordance with my instructions, then G’d will provide you each with flags in the desert. Now Moses made certain that the arrangement of who was going to encamp in which order around the Tabernacle would correspond to the order in which the tribes had carried Yaakov’s bier so that there would be no disagreements. G’d had told him that he would not have to figure out whom to place where as the matter had been arranged already by their patriarch Yaakov.

אנכי עשו בכורך, “it is I Esau, your firstborn.” When Yitzchak asked again: אתה זה בני עשו, “are you this son of mine Esau?” and Yaakov answers אני, “that is me,” we also have to understand the words in the same manner as here. There is no question that Yaakov spoke the truth on every occasion. This is what the prophet (Michah 7,20) emphasized when he said תתן אמת ליעקב, “You gave truth to Yaakov.” A further example of Yaakov speaking the truth when it does not appear this way at first glance, is when he said: “of all that You will give me, I will give a tenth to You as a tithe” (Genesis 28,22). He had twelve sons. When you add Ephrayim and Menashe who were Joseph’s sons of whom Yaakov said: “they shall be for me just like Reuven and Shimon,” (Genesis 48,5) this makes a total of fourteen. When you exclude from these the four firstborns (1 from each of his wives) that left ten sons who were Yaakov’s as opposed to being G’d’s. We have a rule that קדש, something already holy from birth or inception, is not subject to tithing. As a result of all this one of the ten sons had to become G’d’s, i.e. reserved for sacred rather than mundane tasks. This tribe was Levi. You observe that Yaakov’s words turned out to be true (though not recognised as true at the time they were uttered). Something similar is evident in our verse. When Yaakov said אנכי עשו, בכורך, he referred to the fact that he had acquired the birthright from Esau; he meant: “I am the one who replaces your firstborn Esau.” He knew that the only reason his father wanted to bestow the blessing on Esau was that Esau was the firstborn. He therefore hinted to his father Yitzchak that Esau had long ago ceased to be the firstborn (48 years ago) when he had sold his birthright to him. Yaakov was therefore entitled to receive the blessing his father wanted to bestow at this time. He considered himself Esau’s representative in the matter, and we know that legally speaking anyone who is the representative of the principal may act on behalf of that principal. If we needed proof of this, the best proof is that angels who are acting on behalf of G’d are accorded G’d’s name even, such as the angel in Exodus 3,1 who referred to himself as אני ה', “I am the Lord.” There are numerous such examples. One of the most pronounced such examples is found in Genesis 31,13 where the angel says to Yaakov: “I am the G’d of Beit El for whom you have anointed a monument (as an altar) where you have vowed to me, etc.” Clearly, the angel was speaking in the name of his Sender. [Surely, he did not mean to imply that Yaakov had built an altar in honour of an angel. Ed.] When Yaakov said אנכי עשו, בכורך, this was equivalent to his saying: “I am Esau,-to the extent that I am your firstborn.” Had he merely said: “I am Esau,” without adding the words “your firstborn,” this would have been a lie. The reason he added the words “your firstborn” was to draw attention to the fact that the blessing about to be dispensed was meant for the firstborn. When in response to Yitzchak’s question: אתה זה בני עשו, “are you indeed my son Esau, meaning “the one I am supposed to bless,” Yaakov answered: אני, this means: “I am the one.” Had he added the word Esau, he would have lied. By saying אני he merely meant that he was the one entitled to the blessing. As to Yaakov saying immediately afterwards עשיתי כאשר דברת אלי, “I have done as you instructed me,” how could this be truthful seeing that Yitzchak had not instructed him to do anything? We need to understand the word אלי as not meaning “to me,” but as “for my benefit.” Had Yitzchak not instructed Esau to bring him venison, Rivkah would not have overheard this and would not have ordered Yaakov to obtain the blessing (albeit by subterfuge). As to Yaakov’s asking his father: (verse 19) ואכלה מצידי, “in order to eat from my venison,” seeing he had not been hunting at all, how do we explain this without making a liar out of Yaakov? The word מצידי, means “from my food, i.e. from the food I have prepared for you.” We have a parallel example in Scripture of the word ציד meaning simply “food,” in Joshua 9,14 (where the Gibeonites tricking the Israelites are described) Samuel reports ויקחו האנשים מצידם, “the men (the leaders of the Israelites) took from their (the Gibeonites’) food supply,” (in order to check if indeed these people had come from afar) etc.

ותקרא שמו ראובן, “she called his name Reuven.” All the names given to the children of Rachel and Leah were inspired by Holy Spirit assisting their mothers in naming them. The names they gave the children all alluded to certain attributes of G’d. When Leah named her first four sons she alluded to the ten emanations from the bottom up. He called the first son Reuven alluding to the attribute of Justice which corresponds to the last letter ה in the Ineffable Name. Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 44,12) had said that until Avraham had that letter added to his name he was unable to have a son with Sarah. The word ראובן alludes to ראייה, “seeing, taking note of.” The faculty of seeing is derived from the attribute of Justice, and this is why the עין הרע, “the evil eye” is such a dangerous and powerful characteristic as it directs attention to the attribute of Justice, i.e. retribution. The name שמעון which is derived from שמועה, as Leah said: “for G’d has heard that I am hated,” corresponds to an attribute symbolized by the letter ו in the same four-lettered name of G’d, and the 6 directions in which it extends. When Yaakov blessed Ephrayim and Menashe, the two sons of Joseph, by saying: “they shall be to me just as Reuven and Shimon” (Genesis 48,5), he meant to protect them against this influence of the evil eye which is associated with the attribute hate. Similar considerations prevailed when naming all the rest of the twelve sons. I will go into details when we get to the relevant verses.

A garment worn by day. The Nachalas Yaakov explains: Since it is written [in the next verse], “With what shall he lie down?” it is obvious that it is referring to a garment worn by night. [Thus we might think that this verse, too, is the same.] And when it is written, “You must return it to him till sunset,” it means before sunset, as in the verse, “Before ( עד ) I came to you” (Bereishis 48:5). Or [it could mean] that till sunset the garment remains in your hand, and then you should return it to him. Therefore, Rashi [needed to] explain that it is referring to “a garment worn by day.” [Rashi knows this] since he explained in Parshas Ki Seitzei that “and he will lie down in his garment” (Devarim 24:13) [refers to a garment worn by night. Thus, this verse must refer] to a garment worn by day. And [here, following our verse,] it concludes: “With what shall he lie down?” to also include [various types of other] garments [and bedding] used at night. You might ask: What does the lender gain by taking the security from him, if he has to return it [every day]? The Gemara (Bava Metzia 114b) already answered: If he lends with a security, the shmittah year does not release the loan. Furthermore, [if the borrower dies,] the security will not be considered as moveable possessions of the orphans. Therefore these possesions cannot be collected by the creditor.

Now, the two sons who were born to you in Egypt before I came here shall be considered as mine. Ephraim and Manasseh shall be just like Reuben and Simeon to me. (Gen. 48:5)

As Joseph entered with his two sons, Jacob declared that the future of the nation of Israel would feel the impact of these two grandsons as much as they would feel that of the personalities of the other tribes: “Manasseh and Ephraim will be as Reuben and Simeon to me” (Genesis 48:5). Jacob understood that Ephraim was destined for a measure of greatness beyond that of his older brother. No matter Joseph’s preference, Jacob envisioned Ephraim dominating Manasseh, both then and in the future: “Yesimkha Elokim ke-Ephraim ve-khe-Menasheh” (May God make you like Ephraim [first, and then] like Manasseh). (“I know Gideon will be of Manasseh; but Joshua will come from Ephraim!” BR 97:4–5; MHG I, 717 and 722–723; Tan. VeYeĥi 6; PRE 12b; Targum Yerushalmi, Genesis 48:20.)

The primacy of Ephraim, second son of Joseph, was first noticeable when Jacob called upon his two grandsons to bless them. Though Ephraim was the younger, Jacob placed him first. “Now, your two sons that were born to you in the land of Egypt – they are mine! Ephraim and Manasseh will belong to me like Reuben and Simeon” (Genesis 48:5).

ויעשו בניו לו כן כאשר צום, ”his sons did for him exactly in accordance with his instructions.” Rashi understands the emphasis in our verse as being the word בניו “his sons,” i.e. that his grandsons were not to be pallbearers. Some of these grandsons had been mothered by Canaanite women, and Yaakov did not want to be carried by them. If so, it seems hard to understand that Yaakov, while alive and much younger, had not forbidden his sons to marry such women, seeing that Avraham and Yitzchok had both been very concerned about this. Not only this, but Rashi himself on Genesis 38,2 where Yehudah’s marriage to the daughter of a “Canaanite” man by the name of Shua is reported, goes out of his way to explain that the word “Canaanite” in that verse is not an ethnic description but means: “a trader.” It is possible that among Yaakov’s grandchildren there were at least some who had been born to Canaanite mothers, such as “Sha-ul son of the Canaanite” in Genesis (adoptee of Shimon?) As to Rashi explaining that Ephrayim and Menashe acted as pallbearers in lieu of Levi and Joseph, although they too were grandsons of Yaakov, this is no problem, Yaakov having explicitly described both Ephrayim and Menashe as being just like Reuven and Shimon (his sons) in every respect. (Genesis 48,5)

[97] Again, when the sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, were likened to the two elder sons of Jacob, Reuben and Simeon, have we not something perfectly true to nature?  Jacob says, “Thy two sons who were born in Egypt before I came to Egypt are mine. Ephraim and Manasseh shall be as Reuben and Simeon to me” (Gen. 48:5). Let us observe how the two pairs tally with each other.

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: Why not say that the term “one portion” is referring to a mere palm tree or some other relatively small extra gift, instead of a full, equal share? Abaye said to him: For you, i.e., to answer your question, the verse states: “Ephraim and Manasseh, even as Reuben and Simeon, shall be mine” (Genesis 48:5). Evidently, Joseph’s children together received portions equal to that of Reuben and Simeon together, i.e., two full portions.

The Gemara challenges: If so, the twelve tribes are lacking in number, as without the tribe of Levi there are only eleven. Abaye said that it is stated: “Ephraim and Manasseh shall be like Reuben and Simeon to me” (Genesis 48:5), and they are counted as two tribes. Rava said: But isn’t it written: “After the name of their brethren shall they be called in their inheritance” (Genesis 48:6), indicating that it is with regard to inheritance that they are likened to tribes, but not with regard to another matter?

HALAKHAH: “One who makes a vow away from those who will be born,” etc. What is Rebbi Meïr’s reason? “And now your two sons born to you (Gen. 48:5.) ”, and they already were born. What is the Sages’ reason? “Lo, a son is born to the House of David, Josiah his name, (1K. 13:2.) ” and he was not yet born.

HALAKHAH: (Babli 30b.) One understands the Day of Atonement which is atonement for all of Israel. (Babli 30b,31a; Bava batra 121a.) Why on the Fifteenth of Av? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Yasa: For this is the good time to cut wood, because any wood cut on this day does not develop worms; as we have stated there, “any wood containing a worm is disqualified from the altar. (Mishnah Middot 2:5. In the Babli the reason is given that this is the last day on which wood for the altar may be cut before the rainy season.) ” Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav, because on it Hoshea ben Ela abolished the guards which Jeroboam ben Nabath posted on the roads (To prohibit pilgrimages to Jerusalem.) . Cahana asked [Rav]. He did all this good deed and it is written about him (2K. 17:3.) , against him came Salmanessar the king of Assyria? He answered him, because he removed the collar from his neck and hung it on the community’s neck. He did not say, all the people should go on pilgrimage, but, any one who wants to go may go. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac, but some say in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman: On it the tribes were permitted to intermarry. As it is written (Num. 36:7.) , family heritage should not be transferred from tribe to tribe; but the Children of Israel shall stick everyone to the family heritage of his forefathers, etc. And it is written (Num. 36:8.) , any daughter inheriting family heritage in the tribes of the Children of Israel, etc. How is it possible for a daughter to inherit from two tribes? Explain it if her father was from one tribe and her mother from another tribe (According to the Babli, a later generation read Num. 36 to apply only to the daughters of Salpaad and their contemporaries.) . But the Rabbis say, on it the tribe of Benjamin was permitted to intermarry, as it is written (Jud. 21:18.) , cursed be he who gives a wife to Benjamin. They read a verse and included him; they read a verse and excluded him. They read a verse and included him (Gen. 48:5.) , Ephraim and Manasse shall be to me like Reuben and Simeon. They read a verse and excluded him, a people and community of peoples shall be from you and kings will come from your loins (Gen. 35:11. In the explanations, the terms “included” and “excluded” have to be switched. The text follows the usual pattern, that if possibilities A and B are raised, B is explained before A. Since the number 12 of tribe cannot be changed, either Joseph is counted as one tribe and Benjamin is included (35:11), or Ephraim and Manasse are counted as full tribes, there seems to be no place for Benjamin. This logic is not followed by the Babli.) , and Benjamin was not yet born. (Thr. rabba, Introduction (33).) Rebbi Abun said, digging stopped on it, as Rebbi Levi said, on every eve of the Ninth of Av, Moses had a declaration published in all the encampment and said, go out for digging, go out for digging. They went out, dug graves for themselves, and slept. In the morning they were getting up and found themselves missing 15’000 and detail (If always the same number died on the Ninth of Av and nobody during the year, the number would be 600’000:38 = 15’789.47.) . In the last year they did that, got up, and found themselves whole. They said, maybe we erred in the computation. The same on the Tenth, the Eleventh, the Twelfth, the Thirteenth, and the Fifteenth. Since the moon was full they said, it seems that The Holy One, praise to Him, vacated this hard judgment against us. They got up and made a holiday.

§ The mishna stated: Abba Shaul says: Also a woman who curses her husband’s parents in his presence violates the precepts of Jewish women. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: Even when she curses his parents in the presence of his children and not in his presence she is considered one who violates Jewish custom. And your mnemonic is “Ephraim and Manasseh will be to me like Reuben and Simeon” (Genesis 48:5), which teaches that grandchildren have the status of children. Cursing one’s husband’s parents in front of his children is tantamount to doing so in front of the husband himself. Rabba said: An example is that she said in the presence of her husband’s son: May a lion devour your grandfather.

With regard to the distinction between the terms in the mishna, Rav Pappa said to Abaye: Is this to say that the word noladim means those who will be born in the future? But if that is so, it says in the verse: “Your two sons who were born [noladim] to you in the land of Egypt” (Genesis 48:5), does it also mean those who will be born? The verse is referring to Manasseh and Ephraim, who were already alive.

And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you to Egypt, are mine. Ephraim and Menasheh, like Reuvein and Shimon, shall be mine [before me].

And now, thy two sons who have been born to thee in the land of Mizraim before I came to thee into Mizraim are mine; Ephraim and Menasheh as Reuben and Shimeon shall be reckoned unto me.

ומולדך אשר הולדת אחריהם, “and any sons that you will beget after them, etc.” sons of Ephrayim and Menashe that will be born while you are alive, will be considered as yours, founders of tribal families. They will rank on a par with the sons of Yehudah and Asher.

על שם אחיהם, “their names will be subcategories of their fathers’ (who are part of the original twelve brothers) ancestral shares (when it comes to the distribution of the land of Israel)”. The formulation על, here, is similar to: Leviticus 25,31, על שדה הארץ יחשב, “they shall be classed as open country.” This is also reflected in what the Torah writes in 50,23: 'וירא יוסף לאפרים בני שלשים וגו, “and Joseph lived to see the third generation, i.e. children and grandchildren of Ephrayim.” What the Torah tells us there is that although neither of them had been born in the land of Canaan, seeing they had been born during the lifetime of their father or grandfather who had been born in the Holy Land, they were included in the founding families, בתי אבות, of their respective tribes. Other such grandchildren were considered founding families of their respective tribes as they were born in the Holy Land. For instance: grandchildren of Asher, through Briyah. (46,17). According to the Talmud referred to earlier (Baba Batra, 123), it is not clear precisely according to which criteria the distribution of parcels of land during Joshua’s time proceeded.)

Lit. “under the name.”

ומולדתך אשר הולדת אחריהם, "and any sons you beget after them, etc." This means that Joseph and his sons Menashe and Ephrayim would not be counted as three tribes but only as two. Accordingly, whenever the tribes are enumerated we do not find a tribe referred to as "the tribe of Joseph," but as the tribes Ephrayim and Menashe, respectively.

The fact that Jacob excluded mention of Joseph whenever the tribes would be mentioned or enumerated deserves our closer attention. Why would it bother Jacob that including Levi there would be 14 tribes if Joseph were to be mentioned separately? After all it appears from G'd's promise in 35,11 that Jacob was to produce two more tribes, not just one more tribe? Where do we have an indication that the name Joseph as a tribe would be eliminated or superseded? Besides, who told Jacob that the two additional children G'd promised him in 35,11 were to be the two sons of Joseph rather than two sons of another one of his children? Was it not more likely for Jacob to assume that the two additional children G'd had in mind were Peretz and Zerach, the children of the union of Yehudah and Tamar, truly superior children as we know from the fact that dynasties were descended from them?

Perhaps Jacob thought G'd that must have referred to Joseph's children as He had already alluded to the role of Yehudah's children when He had told him that kings would be descended from him in the same verse i.e. ומלכים מחלציך יצאו. However, why do we have to assume that these words referred to the sons of Yehudah rather than that the גוי וקהל גוים themselves would be the kings? Besides, there was always the possibility that G'd had referred to the sons of another one of Jacob's sons.

The plain meaning of the prophecy in 35,11 that "nations and a community of nations" would emanate from Jacob surely must have been that they would emanate from Jacob directly, not from his sons. The Zohar section 1 item 180 claims that the נפש of Jacob and Joseph were closely intertwined and that we have proof of this in Psalms 77,16 where the sons of Jacob and Joseph are almost equated by the use of a conjunctive letter ו by the psalmist to show how close these two were to one another. Kabbalists describe that letter ו as מלוי הוי׳ו, i.e. that the מלוי is equivalent to the word itself. [In other words, Joseph equals Jacob because the psalmist joined his name to Jacob by means of this letter ו. Ed.] In this way Joseph became a "founding father" (patriarch) of tribes. Once we accept this, it was easy for Jacob to realise that of all his sons only his son Joseph was endowed with the ability to be a founding father of the tribes. When G'd had told Jacob that he would beget still more sons, this promise could therefore just as easily have been meant to apply to Joseph having these sons. As a result, Jacob had no reason at all to consider that prophecy as applicable to any of his other sons.

This is why Jacob was quite precise when he said: שני בניך…לי הם, "your two sons…are really mine, just as Reuben and Shimon are mine." He wanted Joseph to understand that he did not look at his sons as his grandsons but as his real sons. It followed that Joseph could no more be part of the tribes than Jacob himself could be part of the tribes.

ומולדתך אשר הולדת, perhaps Joseph had sired other sons during the years that Yaakov had resided in Egypt even though the Torah did not see fit to mention this explicitly. The reason that Joseph did not bring them with him to his father’s bedside may have been that they were too young to travel.Even if you were to understand the word ומולדתך as does Onkelos, and other commentators, i.e. תוליד, as if Yaakov had meant: “whom you will sire,” we also do not find any mention of children born to Joseph after Menashe and Ephrayim.

AND THE CHILDREN THAT WERE BORN TO YOU AFTER THEM. “If you beget any more children, they will not be numbered among my sons, but they will rather be included among the tribes of Ephraim and Menasheh. Nor shall they have a name amongst the tribes as far as inheritance in the Land of Israel is concerned.” Now even though the Land of Israel was divided according to the number of persons, as it is written, To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance, (Numbers 26:54.) and each person received an equal share except for the first-born, who received a double share, (Deuteronomy 21:17.) nevertheless only these sons were designated as “tribes.” This is the language of Rashi. Now this is not correct, for if so, (If, as Rashi says, Joseph’s designation as firstborn meant only that Joseph’s two sons shall be counted as separate tribes, but not that they shall receive a double share in the Land, then it follows that, etc.) then Jacob’s granting of the birthright to Joseph was just nominal, its only effect being that Joseph’s sons would be called “tribes,” whereas the verse states, in their inheritance. (At the end of the verse before us: And the children that were born to you after shall be counted to you; they shall be called after the name of their brethren ‘in their inheritance.’ This indicates that the two sons of Joseph were to be given the extra right of the firstborn in the matter of inheritance.) In the Gemara, (Horayoth 6b.) the Sages have said: “I have likened Ephraim and Menasheh to Reuben and Simeon with respect to the matter of inheritance, but not with respect to other matters,” (As, for example, the case of a Sin-offering which is brought by the great Sanhedrin for an erroneous decision, followed by most of the tribes even though they did not constitute an actual majority of the entire population. In that case Ephraim and Menasheh are considered part of the tribe of Joseph.) as is stated in Tractate Horayoth. (Horayoth 6b.) Our Rabbis have mentioned in many places (Baba Bathra 123a.) that Joseph was the first-born as far as inheritance was concerned, and that he received a double share in the Land, as is the rule of every first-born, (Deuteronomy 21:17.) but not that his being first-born consisted merely of his sons being called “tribes,” as the Rabbi [Rashi] would have it. From this we further learn that the Land was not divided among all the tribes of Israel according to their populations for if so, what was the significance of this primogeniture with respect to inheritance? If we would say it meant that each and every individual offspring of Joseph was given double that of each person of all other tribes, this is not mentioned at all in Scripture, and we do not find Jacob giving the birthright to Joseph except by what he said here, As Reuben and Simeon shall they be to me,, (Verse 5 here.) and based upon this, Scripture states, His [Reuben’s] birthright was given to the sons of Joseph the son of Israel. (I Chronicles 5:1.) If so, then Ephraim and Menasheh were fully considered as two tribes, and it was this which constituted Joseph’s birthright, and the words of the Sages indeed corroborate this everywhere. Thus the matter is not at all as the Rabbi (Rashi. Rashi’s premise that the Land was divided according to population is disputed by Ramban. Since, according to Ramban, each tribe received an equal portion, he proceeds to differ with Rashi and says that Joseph received twice as much land as any other tribe since Ephraim and Menasheh were considered separate tribes.) stated it. Instead, the Land of Israel was divided according to tribes. They made twelve equal parts of it, with Simeon, the least populous of the tribes, taking a share equal to that of Judah, the most populous of the tribes, and thus, Ephraim and Menasheh took exactly the same amount of land as Reuben and Simeon. This is the conclusion of the Gemara in the chapter, Yesh Nochalin. (Baba Bathra 121b. Yesh Nochalin (“There are some that inherit,”) the eighth chapter of that tractate, deals with all problems of personal inheritance, as well as with the whole range of problems connected with the original division of the Land by Joshua.) Scripture also states, Ye shall divide the land for inheritance according to the twelve tribes of Israel, Joseph receiving two portions. (Ezekiel 47:13.) So too does Onkelos say, (In translating the blessing bestowed upon Joseph by Jacob. Further, 49:22.) “Two tribes shall come forth from his sons. They shall receive chulka ve’achsanta (portion and inheritance),” which means that they shall be equal to the other tribes with respect to inheritance received. Now chulka (portion) refers to the extra share of the first-born, and achsanta (inheritance) refers to ordinary inheritance. In the verse stating, To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance, and to the fewer thou shalt give the less inheritance, (Numbers 26:54. This verse, which seems to indicate that the Land was divided according to population, as Rashi taught, is explained by Ramban as referring to the internal division within each tribe.) Scripture refers to the paternal families mentioned there in the chapter. (Ibid., Verses 8-50.) Scripture is stating that the tribe divides its share of the land among the paternal families that left Egypt by giving a larger portion to a more populous family and a smaller portion to a less populous family, with the dead becoming heirs of the living, as is explained in the Sifre (Sifre Pinchas 132. See also Ramban on Numbers 26:54.) and is mentioned by Rashi in the Parshah of Pinchas. (Rashi, ibid.) Thus the general principle with respect to Joseph was that he was the first-born as regards inheritance, and if, as mentioned in the Gemara, (Baba Bathra 121b. Yesh Nochalin (“There are some that inherit,”) the eighth chapter of that tractate, deals with all problems of personal inheritance, as well as with the whole range of problems connected with the original division of the Land by Joshua.) the land was divided according to the number of tribes, they gave the children of Joseph portions equal to those of Reuben and Simeon. And even if we were to say that the land was divided according to the number of persons, as is apparent from the verse, (To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance, etc. (Numbers 26:54.)) then we would say that they gave them double portions commensurate with their numbers — an ordinary share as large as all the other people, and a second portion for the birthright. In that case, the meaning of Jacob’s words, As Reuben and Simeon shall they be to me, (Verse 5 here.) is that they should receive as many shares as twice their number of people. But that Joseph should be as the other tribes with respect to inheritance, with the birthright consisting of his two sons being called “tribes,” as the Rabbi (Rashi. In his commentary to Numbers 26:54, Ramban further discusses this problem at great length.) stated, this is impossible under any circumstance.

ומולדתך, your children or grandchildren who will be born or have been born after my arrival in Egypt (during the last 17 years). על שם אחיהם יקראו, they will have the same status as their brothers, i.e. they will not each be considered as the founding father of one of the tribes, but בתי אבות, heads of family groupings within the tribe they belong to (Menashe or Ephrayim). All the seventy souls included in the count of people descending to Egypt with Yaakov, whether his sons or his grandsons, became the heads of such family groups. And this was of relevance when the land of Israel was distributed by Joshua. The Talmud Baba Batra 118 discusses this in detail, basing itself on Numbers 26,21 mentioning such families as Peretz and Chetzron, etc., as well as the members of the family of Elon and Ard and Naamon mentioned in verses 40 and 53-55 respectively in that same chapter. What applied in those situations would also apply to children of Joseph born after Yaakov’s arrival in Egypt.

Although the Land was divided according to the number of heads — as it is written, (Numbers 26:54) “To the more numerous thou shalt give a larger inheritance” — and each person had an equal share except those who were first-born sons (and these received a double share), yet only these of Joseph’s sons bore the name of “tribe” when it became a matter of casting lots for the partition of the land according to the number of the tribes (cf. Numbers 26:55), and of appointing princes to the various tribes and of assigning banners to each of them.

ומולדתך אשר הולדת אחריהם, your grandchildren, who are truly called מולדתך, seeing that this expression includes children and grandchildren,לך יהיו, they will be known as part of בית יוסף, the house of Joseph, bearing your name. And their blessing will be part of your blessing, not separate blessings.על שם אחיהם יקראו בנחלתם, everyone of Menashe’s sons will also incorporate the name of his father Menashe, as will the sons of his brother, who will also incorporate the name of their father Ephrayim as part of their individual names. They were to inherit part of the land of Israel together with Yaakov’s other sons.

If you will have any more children they will not be counted... Since אשר seems to imply that he surely will have children, Rashi explains: “If you will have any more children.” This is because אשר can mean אם (if). Since we find that אם can mean אשר, as Rashi explained on 24:19, therefore אשר can mean אם.

Nevertheless, the only ones to be called Tribes are these... Each tribe’s inheritance was called by its own name: Reuven’s inheritance, Shimon’s inheritance, etc. Similarly, the inheritance of Menasheh and Ephraim will be called by their name: Menasheh’s inheritance and Ephraim’s inheritance, each with his own territory, like the other tribes. It will not be called Yoseif’s inheritance. And when Rashi said above: “They [the future children of Yoseif] will not have their own names as tribes,” it means that their inheritance will not be called by their name.

Manasseh and Ephraim were Joseph’s older sons, born before the onset of the years of famine. Even if no children had been born to Joseph during the famine, as the Sages maintain, he likely had others after those difficult years. However, as they were still young at this point, the matter that Jacob is discussing does not apply to them. And therefore, your progeny that you beget after them, after Manasseh and Ephraim, they shall be yours and considered part of your immediate family, not as my adopted sons. This means that they shall be called after the name of their brothers in their inheritance. When the inheritance is divided among the sons of Jacob, those sons shall be considered part of the tribe of Ephraim or of Manasseh.

אשר הולדת אחריהם, “whom you have sired after them;” according to the past tense used here, it is quite possible that Joseph had begotten more children after Menashe and Ephrayim. The reason why the Torah had not spelled this out is because they would inherit with their brothers, not separately. The fact that this is the likely explanation is supported by the fact that Yaakov continued at length with: “and now, your two sons who have been born before I came down to Egypt, etc.” This appears to support the theory that Joseph had indeed had other children, and that these were born to him after the famine had ceased. Alternately, the words אשר הולדת could be understood to mean אשר תוליד, “whom you will beget;” we have numerous examples of a past tense being used where we would have expected a future tense. The fact that we do not hear about other children does not prove that there were none. At any rate, Yaakov may have told Joseph what the status of such children would be in the event they would yet be born for him.

The Order of Simchat Torah: In places where they do two days of Yom Tov, Kiddush on the ninth night includes Shehecheyanu. The next day, we take out three Torah scrolls. From the first, we read "And this is the blessing" [Deuteronomy 33:1] until the end of the Torah. From the second, we read from "In the beginning" [Genesis 1:1] until "that God made" [2:3]. From the third, the maftir reads the same as the previous day. The haftarah is "After Moses died" [Joshua 1:1]. Rem"a: The last day of Yom Tov is called "Simchat Torah" because we rejoice on it, making a festive meal in honor of the finishing of the Torah. It is customary for the person who finishes the Torah and the one who starts Genesis to make a donation and invite everybody to a party (Tur). It is customary in these countries to take all of the Torahs out of the Ark on Simchat Torah at night and in the morning and to sing songs and praises. Every place should follow its customs. It is also the custom to circle the synagogue's Bimah with the Torah scrolls just like we circle with the lulav. This is all done out of joy. It is also the custom to have many readers from the Torah. We read the same section many times, and this is not forbidden (Minhagim, Rivas"h 84). It is also the custom to call up all of the children to the Torah and to read "the angel who has redeemed me..." [Genesis 48:6]. In the evening, we read the special sections from the Torah that are normally auctioned off, every place according to its custom. It is also the custom that even a child can finish off the Torah, even though there are those who say that specifically a scholar should finish it (Mordechai's small notes). Nowadays when the chazzan does the actual reading, there is no issue (his own opinion). In a place with only two Torah scrolls, we read "And this is the blessing" from the first, "In the beginning" from the second, and then we go back and reuse the first for the section associated with the day. This is done whenever three Torahs are needed but there are only two (found written somewhere).

R. Juda said in the name of Rab: "He who withholds from imparting an Halacha to a disciple is considered as if he would rob him of the inheritance of his ancestors, for it is said (Deut. 33, 4) The law which Moses commanded us is the inheritance of the congregation of Israel. Hence the law is considered as an inheritance to all Israel since the creation of the world." R. Chana b. Bizna, in the name of R. Simon the Pious said: "He who withholds (or denies) the explanation of an Halacha to a disciple, even the embryos in the entrails of their mothers, curse him, as it is said (Prov. 11, 26) Him that withholdeth corn, (Fol. 92) (l'om) the people will (ye'kabuhu) denounce, and the word l'am refers to embryos, as it is said (Num. 23, 8) How shall I denounce (Kabo) whom God … , and Bar means the Torah, as it is said (Ps. 2) And if one do teach." What will be his reward for such? Raba, in the name of R. Shesheth, said: "He will be rewarded with the blessing with which Joseph was blessed, as it is said (Pr. 11, 26) But blessing will be heaped upon the head of the one (Mashbir) that selleth it, and Mashbir refers to Joseph; as it is said (Gen. 48, 6) And Joseph, he was the governor over the land, he it was that sold corn to all the people." R. Shesheth said again: "He who teaches the Torah in this world will be rewarded by teaching it in the world to come, as it is said (Prov. 11, 25) He that refresheth [others] will do the same in the future." Mar Zutra said: "Whence do we infer the resurrection from the Torah? It is said (Deut. 33, 6) May Reuben live, and not die, i.e., he may live in this world, and not die in the world to come." Rabina says: From the following (Dan. 12, 2) And many of those that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to disgrace and everlasting abhorrence. And R. Ashi said: From (Ib. ib. 13) But thou, go [thy way] toward the end; and thou shalt rest, and arise for thy lot at the end of the days. R. Elazar said: "A leader of a congregation, who leads them humbly, will be rewarded by leading the same in the world to come, as it is said (Is. 49, 10) For he that hath mercy on them will lead them, and by springs of water will he guide them." R. Elazar said again: "Wisdom is of great importance, as it was placed between two divine names (I Sam. 2, 3) For a God of knowledge is the Lord." Another thing said R. Elazar: "Every man who possesses wisdom may consider himself as if the Temple were built in his days, as both wisdom and temple are placed between two divine names." R. Elazar said further: "He who possesses no knowledge does not merit that one should have mercy upon him, as it is said (Is. 27, 11) For it is not a people of understanding; therefore he that made it will not have compassion upon it, and he that formed them will not be gracious unto them." R. Elazar said also: "He who feeds one who does not possess any knowledge, will suffer as a reward for it, as it is said (Ob. 1, 7) They that eat thy bread have struck thee secretly a wound, there is no understanding in them." R. Elazar said again: "A man that has no knowledge will finally be exiled, as it reads (Is. 5, 13) Therefore are my people led into exile, for want of knowledge."

(The yavam) "shall be invested in the name of his dead brother": for inheritance (i.e., he receives his dead brother's share as well as his own.) It is written here "in the name of his brother," and, elsewhere (Bereshith 48:6) "in the name of their brothers (Ephraim and Menasheh) shall they be called in (taking) their inheritance." Just as there, the reference is to taking inheritance, so, here.

TO THE MORE THOU SHALT GIVE THE MORE INHERITANCE. “To a tribe which was larger in population they gave a larger portion [of the Land than that given to the smaller tribes]. And although the portions were [thus] not equal, since they divided [the Land] according to the size of the tribe, they did so only by means of the lot [as commanded in Verse 55], and the lot [assigned the portions] by means of Ruach Hakodesh. ” (“The Holy Spirit.” See above in Seder Chukath, Note 64.) This is Rashi’s language. But the interpretation of our Rabbis about this verse is not so. Instead, they said in the Sifre: (Sifre Pinchas 132.) “To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance. Supposing somebody came out of Egypt with ten sons, and when they entered the Land they were [only] five etc. [we apply to this case the verse, To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance; if on the other hand he had five sons when he came out of Egypt, and when they entered the Land they were ten, we apply to them the verse, and to the fewer thou shalt give the less inheritance]. ” (In other words, the division of the Land depended not on the number of people in each family upon entering the Land, but upon the number that the family had when they left Egypt — hence if they became fewer, we still apply the verse: To the more … since they were more when they left Egypt, and vice versa. It is thus obvious that the Sifre applied these verses to the division of the Land among the fathers’ houses, and not, as Rashi explained it, to the division between the twelve tribes as a whole.) And likewise it is explicitly stated in the Gemara (Baba Bathra 117b.) that the meaning of [this section] according to the Sages was not to distinguish in any way between [the portion given to] each particular tribe [since they each received an equal portion], just as they have said: (Baba Bathra 117b.) “It is well-understood according to the Sage who says [that the Land was divided] according to [the numbers of] those who came out of Egypt, why Scripture states, To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance etc.” (“For if a person came out of Egypt with ten sons, and by the time they entered the Land he only had five sons, we apply to him the verse, To the more etc. ; whereas if he had originally five sons etc. [as explained by Ramban above in the text]. But according to the Sage who says that the Land was divided according to the number of people at the time that they entered the Land, what is the meaning of the phrases: to the more and to the fewer, since each family received a share equal to its numbers at that time?” From this text, too, it is obvious that the Sages were not referring to differences between the portions of larger or smaller tribes, but instead applied this verse to the subsequent allocation of the land among the various families of each tribe.) Furthermore, I have already written in Seder Vayechi Yaakov (Genesis 48:6 (Vol. I, pp. 570-572).) that in the Gemara of the Chapter Yesh Nochalin (“There are some [near of kin] who inherit.” The text quoted here is in Baba Bathra 122a.) the Rabbis expressly came to the conclusion that the Land was not divided according to the heads of men, [i.e., according to the overall population], but it was divided among [all] the tribes [equally]. Thus they divided it into twelve equal parts, and each tribe took that part which was assigned to it by the lot. It was for this [reason] that the sons of Joseph complained about it, saying [to Joshua], ‘Why hast thou given me but one lot and one part for an inheritance, seeing I am a great people?’ (Joshua 17:14.) However, Joshua did not give them any additional [land] at all [since each tribe received an equal share], but he told them, ‘[If thou be a great people], get thee up to the forest, and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the Rephaim; since the hill-country of Ephraim is too narrow for thee, ’ (Ibid., Verse 15.) meaning to say that they should conquer for themselves that land [which had been assigned to them and] which they had not yet taken, and thereby they should extend their border. This is [also the meaning of] that which Scripture says, according to the names of the tribes of their fathers they shall inherit. [According to the lot shall their inheritance be divided] between the more and the fewer. (Further, Verses 55-56.) [That is to say], each of the tribes should take equally, whether it has a large population or a small one. And then the meaning of [the verse which says], To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance, and the fewer thou shalt give the less inheritance, [is not “to the tribe that is more populous you shall give more etc. but] to the members of the tribe itself [for each tribe received an equal portion; and therefore Scripture is saying here that when the tribe divides its portion amongst its individual families, it should give a larger portion to a family with more members etc.]. Or [the meaning of this phrase may be] according to its interpretation [by the Rabbis, as mentioned above], (In other words, the division of the Land depended not on the number of people in each family upon entering the Land, but upon the number that the family had when they left Egypt — hence if they became fewer, we still apply the verse: To the more … since they were more when they left Egypt, and vice versa. It is thus obvious that the Sifre applied these verses to the division of the Land among the fathers’ houses, and not, as Rashi explained it, to the division between the twelve tribes as a whole.) that it [the Land] was divided according to [the numbers of] those who left Egypt. Thus supposing somebody came out of Egypt with ten sons, and when they entered the Land they were [only] five, we apply to this case the verse, To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance.” That is to say, if those ten sons who were twenty years old [or more] at the time that they left Egypt died, and they had five sons [born to them] in the desert, or if [five of the children] were minors [at the time of the exodus], (The Divine decree that the generation of the wilderness was not to enter the Land (see above, 14:29-31) did not apply to those who were minors at the time of the exodus. Hence it was possible for those born in the desert, or were minors at the time of the exodus, to actually take possession of the Land.) and became twenty years of age [in the desert], we apply to such a case the verse, To the more thou shalt give the more, meaning: to those who were more at the time of leaving Egypt, thou shalt give the more [land], even though they are now fewer. “And supposing a person came out of Egypt with five sons, and at the time that they entered the Land they were ten, in that case we apply to him [the verse], and to the fewer thou shalt give the less, ” (Meaning: “and to those who were fewer at the time of the exodus from Egypt, thou shalt give less land, even though they are now, at the time of entering the Land, greater in population.”) as is stated in the Sifre [mentioned above]. However, I have seen there [in the Sifre (Sifre Pinchas 132.) a text explaining our verse] which states [as follows]: “To each one according to those that were numbered of it [shall its inheritance be given]. This teaches us that the Land was only allocated amongst each tribe according to what it was [in population]. Thus it is said, And the children of Joseph spoke unto Joshua, saying: ‘Why hast thou given me but one lot and one part for an inheritance, seeing I am a great people, forasmuch as the Eternal hath blessed me thus?’ (Joshua 17:14.) What does it say [further]? And Joshua said unto them: ‘If thou be a great people, get thee up to the forest, and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the Rephaim; since the hill-country of Ephraim is too narrow for thee. ’ ” (Ibid., Verse 15.) This is the language of this Beraitha. (See Vol. II, p. 133, Note 209.) And it appears from it that the Land was indeed divided [amongst the twelve tribes themselves] according to the number of heads [i.e., according to their population], as the Rabbi [Rashi] has said! But according to the Gemara this [Beraitha] is rejected [as the final interpretation]. Furthermore, if it is so [as the Beraitha implies, that the Land was divided amongst the tribes themselves according to their relative populations], what did the children of Joseph complain about? Surely he [Joshua] gave them [a greater share] in proportion to their larger numbers, as [he gave] the other tribes [according to their relative sizes]! In my opinion this Beraitha is a shortened text, and it is [in fact based] upon that which the Rabbis said in the Gemara (Baba Bathra 118a.) that the children of Joseph complained because of their many [young] children. The explanation of the matter is [thus as follows]: The children of Joseph took [the amount of land which they deserved] as two tribes, the children of Ephraim one share, and the children of Menasheh another share, for so it is written, (Genesis 48:5: As Reuben and Simeon, shall Ephraim and Menasheh be mine.) and neither of their [two] tribes was larger in population than any of the other tribes. Indeed, some of the other tribes were more numerous than they were, for the tribes of Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and Dan were [all] more populous than they were, (Judah numbered 76,500 (Verse 22); Issacher 64,300 (Verse 25); Zebulun 60,500 (Verse 27); Dan 64,400 (Verse 43). Thus they were each larger than the tribe of Ephraim, who were only 32,500 (Verse 37), or that of Menasheh, who were 52,700. It is therefore evident that the tribe of Ephraim did not complain merely because they were a large tribe.) so why [therefore] should they have complained whilst the more numerous ones remained quiet? This [question] applies with even greater force if the Land was divided according to [the number of] those who came out of Egypt, according to the interpretation [of the Sifre quoted above], because the sons of Judah at the [time of the] first census were more numerous than these two tribes [Ephraim and Menasheh] put together! (At the time of the first census, Judah numbered 74,600 (above, 1:27), whereas Ephraim and Menasheh together were only 72,700 (ibid., Verses 33 and 35). Thus the tribe of Judah had far greater cause to complain than Ephraim or Menasheh.) Therefore [we must rather say that] they complained because of their children, for the sons of Menasheh in the [first] census [taken at the time] of the exodus from Egypt totalled thirty-two thousand [and two hundred], (Above, 1:35.) whereas they had increased by the [time of the] second census [taken] in the desert to fifty-two thousand [and seven hundred]! (Verse 34 here. Thus they increased by 20,500.) None of the [other] tribes increased to such an extent. And they [the tribe of Menasheh] continued to increase in population until the [time of the] division of the Land [in the days of Joshua], (From the time of this second census [taken in the fortieth year of Israel’s stay in the desert] until the actual beginning of the division of the Land by Joshua, there was a period of something over seven years, since tradition assigns a period of seven years for the conquest of the Land, and seven years for its division. In the meantime, naturally, the sons of Menasheh continued to increase.) and this also happened in the case of the children of Ephraim. (This text is difficult to understand, because in fact the children of Ephraim decreased in numbers between the first census at the time of the exodus from Egypt and the second census here! [In the first census they totalled 40,500 (Above, 1:33), and in the second census 32,500 (Verse 37 here)]. A suggestion has been made [by Kur Zahav] that Ramban’s meaning is as follows: Since Scripture says that it were the children of ‘Joseph’ who complained [a term which of course comprises the tribes of both Ephraim and Menasheh], it shows that the children of Ephraim also had increased between the time of the second census and the division of the Land, although they had decreased between the time of the first census at the exodus and the second census now. This interpretation is supported by a close reading of the text of Ramban here, who wrote: “[the tribe of Menasheh] continued to increase in population until the [time of the] division of the Land,” and then added: “and this also happened in the case of the children of Ephraim.” See also my Hebrew commentary, p. 312.) Now since these children received no share [in the Land], therefore [the children of Joseph] complained, but there was no man to hear them, (See II Samuel 15:3.) for such was the law — that only those who were above twenty years of age received a share in the Land. (See above, Verses 2 and 53.) Therefore the Beraitha [quoted above] is saying: “According to those that were numbered — who were twenty years old and over. This teaches us that the Land was only allocated amongst each tribe according to what it was [in population] at the time of the census, meaning that they were not to give anything to the children, even if they had grown up and reached the age of twenty at the time that they divided [the Land]. Now the verse stating [that the children of Joseph complained to Joshua, saying]: Why hast thou given me but one lot and one part for an inheritance, seeing I am a great people, (Joshua 17:14.) cannot, as all must agree, be understood as would appear from its literal meaning. For if he [Joshua] divided the Land amongst them [the twelve tribes] according to the number of people [in each tribe], as Rashi explained, then they [the children of Joseph] must have taken their fair share, for according to their greater population, [in the same proportion] they took a larger portion [in the Land]. And if [the Land was divided] according to the [number of] tribes [so that each tribe received an equal part], it is impossible that Joshua should not have given them their share of the birthright, for he would not have transgressed the testament of Jacob! (Genesis 48:5. In other words, it is inconceivable that Joshua should violate Jacob’s command that Joseph’s two sons, Ephraim and Menasheh, should be treated as separate tribes and each receive the same share in the Land that all the other tribes received, instead of treating them as merely one tribe [of Joseph], so that they would together receive only one share. Since this is inconceivable, why then did the children of Joseph complain, for they must have received the extra portion due to them as the birthright which had been taken away from Reuben!) And the Holy One, blessed be He, also commanded likewise in the Torah, [mentioning] the tribes of Ephraim and Menasheh [separately, amongst those who were to take possession of the Land]. (Further, 34:23-24.) Moreover, it is expressly written that he [Joshua] gave them [the children of Joseph] two lots, as it is said, And the border of the children of Ephraim according to their families was thus; (Joshua 16:5 and 8.) This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Ephraim. (Joshua 16:5 and 8.) And [with reference to] the children of Menasheh [it is said], And this was the lot for the tribe of Menasheh; (Ibid., 17:1.) And the border of Menasheh was etc., (Ibid., Verse 7.) just as it is said in the case of [all] the other tribes. But in saying: [Why hast thou given me but] one lot and one part (Joshua 17:14.) they meant to say: “All that you [Joshua] have given the two of us together, each one [of us] deserves to get as his [own] lot.” They used this expression because Joshua at first cast [only] one lot for both of them, as it is said, And the lot for ‘the children of Joseph’ went out from the Jordan at Jericho etc. (Ibid., 16:1.) until: the goings out thereof were at the sea. (Ibid., Verse 3.) And there it is stated, And the children of Joseph, Menasheh and Ephraim, took their inheritance, (Ibid., Verse 4.) meaning to say that they both took their inheritance by means of this [one] lot, and afterwards he divided this portion amongst the two of them by [a further] lot, as it is said there, And the border of the children of Ephraim according to their families was thus, (Ibid., Verse 5.) and it is [further] written, And this was the lot for the tribe of Menasheh. (Ibid., 17:1.) Therefore they [the children of Joseph] said to Joshua: “Behold, this single first lot [which you drew for the two of us before you further subdivided it], each one of us deserves to get, since we are a great people, (Joshua 17:14.) and why [therefore] did you subdivide it afterwards into two parts?” And the [reason for this] complaint, according to the explanation of the Gemara, (Baba Bathra 118a.) was because of their children who increased greatly amongst them. And according to the simple meaning of Scripture, it seems to me that this complaint [to Joshua by the children of Joseph] was that of the children of Menasheh [only, and not that of the children of Ephraim], but the two tribes came to him together. Similarly, Then the children of Judah drew nigh unto Joshua in Gilgal, and Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizite said unto him etc., (Ibid., 14:6.) for that case [affected only] one person, and yet the whole tribe came to join him in his complaint. And the [particular] grievance of the children of Menasheh was because none of the other tribes had left many great cities in the hands of the Canaanites, as had Menasheh, who left [unconquered] the three regions, (Ibid., 17:11.) [which Yonathan translated] “three districts.” A proof for this [explanation of the cause of their grievance] is that it is after it says, And the children of Menasheh could not drive out the inhabitants of those cities, (Ibid., Verse 12.) that it is written: And the children of Joseph spoke, (Joshua 17:14.) for at first they did not complain, until they had waged war against them and they were not able to prevail over them. It is possible that this is the meaning of [the expression] one lot and one part. (Joshua 17:14.) They said: “Because you cast originally one lot for both of us [Ephraim and Menasheh], our portion [in the Land] came together, and so it happened that both of our portions were [allocated] in this place which is difficult to capture but had you cast two lots for us, as was done for all other [separate] tribes, our portion might have been allocated in a place which is easier to conquer.” And Joshua replied [to this claim by saying] that if they go up to the forest of the Perizzites and the Rephaim, (Ibid., Verse 15.) they will be able to select for themselves from there whatever they want, and thus extend their borders. (Ibid., Verse 15.) Then they [the children of Joseph] spoke up and explained their [original] grievance, saying, “The hill-country will also not be enough for us, for all the Canaanites that you have given us in the land of the valley have chariots of iron. ” (Ibid., Verse 16.) Then Joshua told them that he would not give them in the mountain one lot only, (Ibid., Verse 17.) but the whole of the hill-country shall be theirs together with the large forest which is there, (Ibid., Verse 18.) and they should choose for themselves as much as they need from those [lands], and they shall have all the goings out of the borders of the hill-country. And [he further told them that] they would drive out the Canaanites from there though they have chariots of iron, and though they be strong, (Ibid., Verse 18.) as a result of which none of the other tribes wanted it [that land], but they, the two brothers, who are a numerous people and have great power (Ibid., Verse 17.) will [be able to] help each other to drive them [the Canaanites] out. The end of the matter was that Joshua did not listen to them and did not add anything to their portion, for such was the law [that they get in the same proportion as all the other tribes]. We have written at length on this subject, because of the necessity [to clarify this matter fully] and we have furthermore written about it, with proofs, in the section of Vayechi Yaakov. (Genesis 48:6 (Vol. I, pp. 570-572).) The general principle thus is that the law which [the Rabbis] reached as a conclusion in the Gemara (“There are some [near of kin] who inherit.” The text quoted here is in Baba Bathra 122a.) [that the Land was divided amongst the twelve tribes into twelve equal parts] is true, and that is the proper basis on which to explain the verses. Thus the meaning of the section [before us] is as follows: Unto these (Verse 53.) who are mentioned according to their families the Land shall be divided [for an inheritance] according to the number of names, (Verse 53.) giving each male person, according to their number, his share. To the more ye shall give the more inheritance — thus for example they are to divide the land of Reuben into four parts [because the tribe consisted of four main families], (Hanoch, Pallu, Hezron, and Carmi (above, Verses 5-6).) and “we will give to the family of the Hanochites, for example, who were the largest [in population], a greater inheritance, and to the family of the Palluites, [for example], who were the least populous, we will give a smaller share, for to each one according to those that were numbered of the [particular] family shall its inheritance be given, and the whole family shall receive its share in one place.” It was for this reason that He [commanded here] that they should be counted according to their families. Therefore the Sages mentioned [with reference to the law of the Seventh year]: (Torath Kohanim, beginning of Seder Behar.) “If they divided the land [of a tribe] amongst its [main] families, but did not [yet] subdivide it amongst the houses of the families, and each individual does not yet know what his share is … etc.” (“… I might think that the law of the Seventh year applies. For this reason Scripture states, thou shalt not sow ‘thy’ field (Leviticus 25:4) [using the singular, to indicate that] the law applies only when each person recognizes his own field.”)

בטרם תבא שנת הרעב, seeing that Yaakov arrived in Egypt at the beginning of the second year of the famine and he died at the end of seventeen years of having lived in Egypt, he said to Joseph prior to his death: “the two sons of yours who were born before I came i.e. Ephrayim and Menashe, will be to me as Reuven and Shimon.” Any children of Joseph, and he had such, who were born to him after his father arrived in Egypt would be considered as regular grandchildren of Yaakov in respect of the eventual parceling up to the tribes of the soil of the Holy Land. (48,5-6).

On condition that you listen. Rashi is answering the question: The verse should have said אם תשמעו (if you heed), in the same manner as it is written afterwards, “And the curse — if you do not heed.” For אשר (that) implies that they will definitely obey the commandments. But this is not so, for everything is in the hands of Heaven besides the fear of Heaven (Berachos 33b), and so perhaps they may not obey. Therefore Rashi explains: “That you heed” means, “on condition etc.” Also, this [that אשר and אם are written together] explains why Rashi does not say that אשר (that) means אם (if), as he explains in Bereishis that the verse, “Any children that (אשר) you will have (Bereishis 48:6),” means, “if (אם) you will have more.” For in that verse it is not written אם (if). as it is written here, “And the curse — if (אם) you do not heed.” Therefore [regarding the blessing] Scripture should have written אם, since it is the same matter. But the verse here changes and writes אם regarding the curses, yet it uses the word — אשר — regarding the blessings, perforce we need to explain that אשר means, “on condition that you listen,” even though both words could mean “if.” Also, this [that אשר and אם are written together] answers the question posed by Re”m: Why does Rashi explain that אשר means, “on condition that, etc.,” instead of, “if,” since we find אם in place of אשר [i.e., these two words are interchangeable]?

Shall receive the deceased’s share in his father’s estate. You say this means inheritance, or perhaps it only means that if his [i.e., the deceased brother’s] name was Yosef they call him [i.e., the child] Yosef, or [if his name was] Yochanan, they call him Yochanan. It says here “his [deceased] brother,” and it says there (Bereishis 48:6), “They shall be called by their brothers’ name with regard to their inheritance.” Just as there it is [with regard to] inheritance, so here too [it is in regard to] inheritance (Yevamos ibid).

With twelve border demarcations. Meaning: The entire border demarcation was referred to by its tribe [e.g.] this being the border demarcation of Reuven and that being the border demarcation of Shimon. Now we can understand Rashi’s comment in Parshas Vayechi (Bereishis 48:6) that [even though the land was apportioned by population], “Nonetheless only these were termed tribes…” as meaning that the inheritance of Ephraim and Menashe would also be referred to by their name, as the border of Ephraim or the border of Menashe. Re’m writes: This is puzzling, because this is not like either opinion (Bava Basra 117a). For Rabbi Yoshiya says the land was apportioned to those who left Egypt, as it says, “According to the names of their fathers’ tribes should they inherit it” (26:55), while Rabbi Yochanan says that the land of Israel was apportioned to those who came into the land, as it says, “The land shall be apportioned among these…” (26:53). Therefore, how am I to understand [Rashi’s comment (26:55)] “according to the names of their tribes — this inheritance is different…”? He leaves the question unresolved. The answer is that Rashi is answering a question: According to both explanations there is a difficulty as to what is meant by “According to [the names] of their fathers’ tribes.” For it should have merely said, “According to the names of their fathers should they inherit it.” Why was the word “tribes” necessary? Rather, one must say that it was also to expound, “With twelve border demarcations…” This forced Rashi to bring the other interpretation. However, according to the second interpretation there is also the difficulty as to why it said, “fathers” for it should have merely said, “According to the names of the tribes”. Therefore the first reason is also necessary.

This people is to consist of diverse tribes of differing traits, while maintaining complete unity.…This people should represent the agricultural nation, the merchant nation, the warrior nation, the nation of scholars.…[I]t should demonstrate for all to see that the one great mission…does not depend on a particular vocation or trait.…The division of the nation into diverse tribes, and the resulting division of the Land into different provinces for the different tribes, whose distinctiveness is thus to be retained, is what is indicated here [in the verse: a community of peoples]. Without the division into diverse tribes, all distinctiveness would be absorbed in the consolidated mass of the nation as a whole, just as the land would be divided among the nation as a whole and not according to different tribes. Hirsch, Genesis 48:3–6

The Gemara challenges: If so, the twelve tribes are lacking in number, as without the tribe of Levi there are only eleven. Abaye said that it is stated: “Ephraim and Manasseh shall be like Reuben and Simeon to me” (Genesis 48:5), and they are counted as two tribes. Rava said: But isn’t it written: “After the name of their brethren shall they be called in their inheritance” (Genesis 48:6), indicating that it is with regard to inheritance that they are likened to tribes, but not with regard to another matter?

The baraita continues and asks: Do you say that he succeeds in the name of his brother for inheritance, or perhaps it is only to inherit his name? If, e.g., the deceased brother was named Yosef, they must call the son born from levirate marriage Yosef, or if his name was Yoḥanan, then they must call him Yoḥanan. The baraita answers: It is stated here: “He shall succeed in the name of his brother,” and it is stated there: “They shall be called after the name of their brothers in their inheritance” (Genesis 48:6). Just as the word “name” stated there in Genesis is referring explicitly to inheritance, so too, the word “name” stated here in Leviticus means with regard to inheritance.

But your progeny that will be born after them shall be yours. They shall be called by their brother’s name with regard to their inheritance.

And thy children whom thou mayest beget after them shall be thine; by the name of their brethren shall they be called in their inheritance.

ואני בבואי מפדן ארם, “as far as I a am concerned, when I came from Padan Aram , etc.” (Yaakov, who insists on being buried in the cave of Machpelah, owes Joseph an explanation for why he did not bury Joseph’s mother Rachel there, when he was much closer).“Rachel died on me suddenly at a time when I did not yet possess undisputed entitlement to that burial ground, since your uncle Esau had not yet ceded it to me by leaving the Land of Canaan with his whole family, so that an attempt to do so would have involved me in a confrontation with Esau, and it would have been most unseemly for your mother remaining unburied at that time. When I buried my wife Leah in the cave of Machpelah, Esau had already vacated the land of Canaan.”

ואקברה שם, “I buried her there,” (where she had died) I knew that the piece of land where I buried her would in the future be still part of the ancestral heritage of Binyamin, and it would be fitting for her to have her last resting place in soil that would be part of her children’s heritage. We find an interesting verse in Samuel 10,2, where Samuel has just crowned the first Jewish King, Shaul, a descendant of Rachel from the tribe of Binyamin, and says to the newly crowned King: “when you leave me this day, you will meet two men near the tomb of Rachel in the territory of Binyamin, at a place called Zeltzah;” Yaakov, added that if he had buried Rachel in the cave of Machpelah, which is in the territory of Yehudah, a son of Leah, this would not have been appropriate, seeing that she and Leah had been rivals during their lifetime. An alternate exegesis of this paragraph, quotes Yaakov as follows: “the reason that I have buried your mother where I did, at the time, was that seeing that she had died in childbirth and having to transport her any distance would most likely have resulted in her blood becoming putrid after having soiled her shroud. Seeing that I wanted to at least bury her in the holy soil of the land of Israel, I buried her where I did, just inside that land.”(Compare Rashi’s commentary on this verse, according to whom Rachel’s tomb was outside the Holy Land.)

[AND AS FOR ME, WHEN I CAME FROM PADDAN.] Rachel died suddenly and I was not able to transport her to the cave of Machpelah and inter her there, as I did with Leah. Jacob told this to Joseph so that he would not be angry with him for requesting that he do for him what he didn’t do for his mother.

ואני בבאי מפדן מתה עלי רחל, "As for me, when I was coming from Padan Rachel died on me, etc." This verse seems to lack any connection to what preceded it. We do not even know what purpose this information is supposed to serve at this point. It is true that Rashi based on Midrash Lekach Tov explains that Jacob wanted to explain to Joseph why he had imposed upon him the difficult and tedious task of burying him in the land of Canaan while he himself had not buried Rachel in the cave of Machpelah which was much closer to the site of her death than Egypt from Machpelah. If that had been the Torah's purpose in writing this then it should have appeared in conjunction with 47,30 rather than here. Besides, what did Jacob mean when he said עלי, "she died on me?"

Actually, having told Joseph that G'd had told him that he would have more children himself, Jacob now explained to Joseph that it was his own fault that this did not happen as Rachel had died prematurely because of his negligence by delaying to honour the vow he had made after the dream of the ladder. This is the meaning of מתה עלי, "she died on my account." The words ואני בבאי refer to the promised additional children not being physical issue of Jacob but that Joseph's children were the incarnation of that promise. Vayikra Rabbah 37,1 tells us that if someone makes a vow and is tardy in keeping it he is punished by having to bury his wife. Jacob's saying ואני בבאי מפדן מתה עלי רחל is quoted as the source for this statement. Alternatively, Jacob may have referred to his rash curse of "anyone who has stolen Laban's teraphim shall not live" which he made without knowing that Rachel had been the thief. In either event, had Rachel remained alive Jacob himself would have sired the additional sons G'd had promised to him in 35,11.

It is also possible that Jacob intended to placate Joseph for having been instrumental in hastening his mother's death. He told him that the reason he considered Joseph's two sons as if they were equal to Reuben and Shimon was in expiation for having caused Rachel's death at the time. He added that although he buried Rachel בעוד כברת ארץ, "a tract of land away, (and had not buried her in the cave of Machpelah)," he asked Joseph to go to the trouble of burying him there.

ואני בבואי מפדן, “as to my own situation, when I was on the way from Padan, etc.,” seeing that Yaakov was about to request from Joseph that he bury him in the cave of Machpelah he first had to apologise to him for not having brought Joseph’s mother Rachel to be buried there; this is why he said: “Rachel died on me on the journey in the land of Canaan.” He emphasised that Rachel too had been buried in the Holy Land and not outside its boundaries. The fact that she was not buried in the cave of Machpelah was due only to her sudden and unexpected death which did not afford Yaakov an opportunity to carry her all the way to Chevron seeing he had so many children and cattle with him. Had he buried her there she would have started to decompose on the journey to that cave which would have taken several days at least. According to our best estimates today such a journey should not have taken longer than half a day. This is why he emphasised that although she died “on the way,” she was not buried on the way, but on a hill, a distinctive place.

ואקברה שם בדרך אפרת, “and I buried her there on the way to Efrat.” The words “I buried her there” would have sufficed. Why did he add the words: “on the way to Efrat?” We have already seen told that Rachel died only a tract of land away from Efrat, another name for Bethlehem. Yaakov hinted what our sages told us in Bereshit Rabbah 82,10 that Yaakov buried Rachel where he did as he foresaw that in the future Jews going into exile would pass her grave and she would offer prayers on their behalf. This is what the prophet (Jeremiah 31,15) referred to when he wrote: “Thus said the Lord: ‘a voice is heard in Ramah- wailing bitter weeping- Rachel weeping for her children.’” All of these details Yaakov revealed now so that Joseph would not become angry at what might appear an unreasonable request by his father who himself had not shown such concern about Joseph’s mother. This is what Nachmanides wrote on our verse.

ואקברה שם, I had to bury her there as her body was in a physically detestable state as a result of just having given birth (which did not enable me to delay burying her without subjecting her body to indignities).

ואני, this entire paragraph was inserted to describe Yaakov’s apology or justification to Joseph why he, who was so insistent on where he wanted to be buried and who was putting Joseph to so much trouble in this connection, had himself not acted in a similar manner when it came to burying Joseph’s mother, his own favourite wife, seeing that he had buried Leah in the cave of Machpelah. He explained that he had in no way been at fault, that it was not negligence on his part, but that fate had intervened, Rachel dying suddenly on route to the land of Canaan. The fact that he was moving extremely slowly at the time on account of all his livestock, something that the Torah had reported Yaakov as explaining already to Esau at the time, (33,13) made it impossible for him to carry Rachel’s body with him seeing he had no means to embalm it and keep it from decaying and becoming putrid until he would reach Chevron. Presumably, the season was summer when it is even harder to keep a body from decaying quickly. He therefore chose to bury her without delay, in the most dignified manner which the prevailing conditions had permitted.

AND I BURIED HER THERE. In Rashi’s commentary it is written, “And I did not transport her for burial even to Bethlehem to bring her into the Land.” Now I do not know the meaning thereof. Was Rachel buried outside of the Land? Forbid it! She died within the Land, and she was buried there, just as it says here in the parshah: Rachel died by me in the land of Canaan. (In the verse before us.) And there in the narrative of her death it is still more clearly written, And Jacob came to Luz, which is in the land of Canaan — the same is Beth-el, (Above, 35:6.) and it is further stated, And they journeyed from Beth-el and there was still some way to come to Ephrath, (Ibid., Verse 16.) and Rachel died on the way between Beth-el and Bethlehem Ephratha in the Land of Israel.

AND I BURIED HER THERE. “Now I know that there is some resentment in your heart against me [for not having brought her into the city]. But you should know that I buried her there by the word of G-d, that she might help her children when Nebuzaradan (Chief general of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, who destroyed the city of Jerusalem, burned the Temple, and led the people into captivity (II Kings 25:8-21).) would exile them,” for when they passed along that road, Rachel came forth from her grave and stood by her tomb beseeching mercy for them, as it is said, A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her children, (Jeremiah 31:15.) and the Holy One, blessed by He, answered her, Thy work shall be rewarded … and the children shall return to their own border. (Ibid., Verses 16-17.) This is the language of Rashi. Now in any case there should be some allusion in Scripture to this interpretation which is stated in this Agadah. Perhaps this is alluded to in the expression of the verse, She died by me … in the way … And I buried her in the way, (The second baderech (in the way) is unnecessary except as an allusion to “the way” which Rachel’s children were destined to use when they went into captivity. (Bachya. See my Hebrew commentary on Ramban, p. 261.)) that is to say, “She died on the road which her children would pass, and I buried her there for her advantage.” She did not die on the road, but in Ramah, (See Ramban, above, 35:16.) a city in the land of Benjamin, and there she was buried. [Thus, according to the Midrash, Scripture is implying that] she died on the road which her children were destined to pass in the future, as Scripture does not fully explain future events but only alludes to them in a general manner. In line with the plain meaning of Scripture, it is likewise understood that Jacob spoke to Joseph in an apologetic vein so that when he discerned his father’s wish to be buried in the cave of Machpelah, Joseph should not be angered about his failure to bury his mother there just as he buried Leah there. It was for this reason that Jacob told him that she died in the land of Canaan, and she was not buried outside of the Land in the manner in which an Egyptian burial would befall Jacob. Furthermore, she died on the road suddenly, and he could not bury her in the cave of Machpelah for how could he leave his children and his flocks on the road and hurry with her body to the cave of Machpelah? And where could he find doctors and medicines to embalm her? This is the meaning of the word alai (by me) [in the verse, Rachel died by me]. Even though the cave of Machpelah is but a half-day’s distance from the place of her death, Jacob was heavily laden with much cattle and family, and he would not arrive there for many days. Thus he did indeed spend many days on that road until he came to his father. Our Sages have further taught: (Moed Katan 27a.) “The bier of a woman may never be set down, out of respect.” Now it is my opinion that these are but words of apology as Joseph already knew that Rachel died on the road and was buried in the Land, and that honor was paid to her when she died. But the reason Jacob did not transport Rachel to the cave of Machpelah was so that he should not bury two sisters there, (For being married concurrently to two sisters was later prohibited by the Torah (Leviticus 18:18). See also Ramban above, pp. 330-2.) for he would be embarassed before his ancestors. Now Leah was the one he married first, and thus her marriage was permissible, while he married Rachel out of his love for her and because of the vow he made to her. (Since he married her while already married to Leah, the wedding to Rachel would have been forbidden according to the Torah’s later prohibition. Hence her burial place could not be in the cave of Machpelah. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 262.)

ואני בבואי מפדן, on the same route after G’d had given me His blessing, מתה עלי רחל, while I was still on the same route, this is why I had to bury her there while on the way. There did not present itself an opportunity to bury her next to Leah in the cave of Machpelah. Yaakov elaborated on this now so that Joseph would not consider him as having been criminally negligent in not according his mother the kind of burial she was entitled to.

'ואני בבאי מפדן וגו AND AS FOR ME, WHEN I CAME FROM PADAN etc. — “And although I trouble you to take me for burial into the land of Canaan and I did not do this for your mother (i.e., I did not take the trouble to bury her in a place other than that in which she died, which was by the road-side) which I might easily have done since she died quite close to Bethlehem”.

כברת ארץ is a measure of land equal to 2000 cubits which is the extent of a Sabbath day’s journey. This is according to the statement of R. Moses the Expositor. — “Do not imagine that it was the rains which prevented me from bringing her to Hebron for burial. It was the dry season when the ground is riddled and full of holes like a sieve (כברה).

ואקברה שם AND I BURIED HERE THERE and did not carry her even the short distance to Bethlehem to bring her into a city. I know that in your heart you feel some resentment against me. Know, however, that I buried her there by the command of God”. And the future proved that God had commanded him to do this in order that she might help her children when Nebuzaradan would take them into captivity. For when .they were passing along that road Rachel came forth from her grave and stood by her tomb weeping and beseeching mercy for them, as it is said, (Jeremiah 31:15) “A voice is heard in Rama, [the sound of weeping … Rachel weeping for her children]”, and the Holy One, blessed be He, replied to her (v. 16) “There is a reward for thy work, says the Lord etc. (v. 17) for thy children will return to their own border”. Onkelos translated it (כברת ארץ) by כרוב ארעא which is a full measure of one day’s ploughing. I am of opinion that they had a definite measure which they called “one full furrow”; old French cordié. So we say, (Bava Metzia 107a) “He ploughs (כריב) and ploughs again”, and (Yoma 43b) “as much earth as a fox carries on its feet from a ploughed field (בי כרבא).”

מתה עלי, es war ein Verhängnis, das über mich gekommen. כברת siehe Kap. 35, 16. — Man pflegt die Äußerung, in welcher Jakob hier auf Rachels Tod und Begräbnis hinblickt, als Entschuldigung dafür zu erklären, daß er ein so bedeutendes Gewicht darauf legt, in Machpela begraben zu werden, und doch Josefs Mutter selbst nicht dort begraben hatte. Allein, wäre dies der Sinn, so hätten wir dies oben bei der früheren Unterredung erwarten sollen, wo Jakob sich eben das Versprechen hinsichtlich seines Begräbnisses geben ließ. In dem Zusammenhange, in welchem wir es hier erblicken, kann es nur in Beziehung zu der hier, hinsichtlich der Söhne Josefs, getroffenen Bestimmung stehen. In dieser Unterredung bis zu dem Momente, in welchem er V. 8 seinen Enkeln die Stellung in der Zukunft seiner Nation segnend erteilt, wird Jakob nur als Jakob und nicht als Jisrael bezeichnet. Als Josef V. 2 zu ihm kam ויתהזק ישראל nahm sich Jakob zusammen, um Josef nicht nur als seinen Sohn, sondern in seiner Bedeutung für die nationale Zukunft anzuschauen, die an den Namen שראל׳ sich knüpft, und von diesem Standpunkt aus spricht er auch V. 8 seinen Segen über Josefs Söhne aus. Allein deren Begünstigung als Doppelstamm floss aus Jakobs individueller Beziehung, daher V. 3 ויאמר יעקב, und erst V. 8 wieder ירא ישראל. Es scheint nämlich diese Begünstigung der Söhne Josefs nicht aus nationalen Rücksichten, sondern aus individuell persönlichen Beziehungen erflossen zu sein, die Jakob als Jakob, als Mensch in seiner Individualität, berühren. In den letzten Tagen seines Lebens tritt ihm ganz besonders das Bild der Frau ins Gedächtnis, die er am innigsten geliebt, die das eigentliche Weib seiner Wahl gewesen, die ihn am frühesten verlassen und die ihrem ganzen Geschicke nach Gefahr lief, für die späteren Nationalerinnerungen in den Hintergrund zu treten. Wenn einmal die Söhne Israels in späteren Zeiten das Grab ihrer Stammeltern aufsuchen, werden sie Abraham und Sara, Jizchak und Rebekka, Jakob und Lea finden, aber Rahel, Josefs Mutter, war es nicht einmal im Tode vergönnt, ihren Platz in der gemeinsamen Ruhestätte der Stammeseltern zu erhalten. Und nur zwei Stämme — ganz gleich den früher Mägde gewesenen Müttern Bilha und Silpa — nennen sie ihre Mutter. So würde gerade das Weib seines Herzens, das er sich als die eigentliche Mutter seines künftigen Volkes gedacht, aus dem Herzen der Nation verschwinden. Daher war es Jakobs Herzensbedürfnis, Josef, Rahels Erstgeborenen, zum Erstgeborenen seines Stammvolkes zu erheben, ihm durch Bestimmung seiner Söhne zum Doppelstamm die nationale Erstgeburt zu erteilen und damit zugleich Rahels Gedächtnis wenigstens in einem Stamme mehr als Bilhas und Silpas fortleben zu lassen.

ואני, maybe you think that when G’d said to me: “I will make you into a community of nations,” that He meant that I myself would become the father of more sons but that I was denied those on account of some sin, this cannot be because

בבואי מפדן, when I came away from Padan Aram, when G’d appeared to me,

מתה עלי רחל, as the sages say (Sanhedrin 22) a woman’s death is felt first and foremost by her husband; [hence the justification for Yaakov saying עלי, “for me,” i.e. the loss was mine. Ed.]

בדרך בעוד כברת ארץ לבא אפרתה, immediately after G’d finished speaking to me before I had even arrived at Beyt Lechem, ואקברה שם בדרך אפרת, and I had to bury her there on the route to Efrat; I was so overcome by grief at the time that I did not even have the strength to transport her remains to the burial grounds in Beyt Lechem. There is no doubt that ever since her death my heart was so full of grief that my libido had completely ceased to be active and I would not have been able to sire more children and to thereby become dirtied by sin, even if I had felt the desire to do so. [The author describes the act of procreation as “sinful,” meaning that even among the most pious, the act of ejaculating is itself accompanied by some impure thought, a degree of physical gratification. Ed.].

When the earth is riddled with holes like a sieve. Rashi explained כברת as a measure. Nevertheless, since Scripture chose to use the word כברת, both [explanations] are implied.

Even to Beis Lechem in order to bring her to a [settled] land... You might ask: Does the verse not state clearly that she was buried in Eretz Yisrael? For it is written, “Rochel died unto me in the land of Canaan,” and Canaan is Eretz Yisrael. [If so, why does Rashi say that Yaakov did not bring her לארץ?] The answer is: Surely she was buried in Eretz Yisrael, but לארץ means “to an inhabited town,” as in ארץ נושבת (Shemos 16:35).

I buried her there so that she may help her descendants... You might ask: Did Rashi not previously explain (30:15) that “because she made light of being with the tzaddik, she did not merit being buried with him”? The answer is: Although this caused her to not be buried with him in Me’aras Hamachpelah, the question remains: why did she not merit burial in a town, rather than in a field? Perforce, “So she might help her descendants...” But we cannot say that “help her descendants” was the sole reason, and not “she made light.” For if so, why was Rochel — out of all the matriarchs — not buried with Yaakov? Surely, it was also because “she made light.” Question: Why did Yaakov tell Yoseif only now that her burial on the road was according to the word of Hashem? [The answer is:] Yaakov did not want to reveal to him the future troubles [of Israel’s exile] until necessary. For if not now, when?

As is mentioned: “He plows repeatedly.” This means to plow and then repeat it.

And I, when coming back from Padan Aram, your mother Rachel died on me in the land of Canaan on the road, while still some distance to arrive at Efrat, not in an inhabited area. And therefore I buried her there on the road to Efrat, which is another name for Bethlehem. Since it was impractical to bring her to the family burial plot in Hebron, I buried her where she died. 1 Indeed, to this day the tombstone assumed to mark Rachel’s grave is located outside the city of Bethlehem. In the past, it was presumably even farther outside of the city than it is currently. 2

ואקברה שם, “and I was forced to bury her there.” Nachmanides questioned what Rashi explains here, i.e. that Yaakov apologized to Joseph that he had not even been able to transport the remains of Rachel the short distance to Beyt Lechem so that she would be buried on holy soil. Nachmanides feels that the text does not only not support this, but supports the very reverse, that Rachel, though not buried in a cemetery, was indeed buried within the boundaries of Eretz Yisrael. Why else would Yaakov have said that Rachel had died suddenly, “in the land of Canaan?” Yaakov’s apology concerned the fact that he had not buried Rachel in the cave of Machpelah in Chevron, not that he had buried her outside the boundaries of the Holy Land. He emphasizes that although he had not been able to bury her in Machpelah, at least he had been able to bury her inside the Holy Land. He had not been able to abandon his entire family and carry the remains of Rachel all the way to the cave of Machpelah. He himself was likely to be buried outside of the Holy Land unless he could arrange before his death to have his remains transferred, as he was about to request from Joseph. If, at the time of Rachel’s death he would have moved his entire camp with him to the cave of Machpelah, a journey which takes a half a day for a single traveler would have consumed many days and would have been a great indignity for the remains of Rachel as he had no means to embalm her and to prevent her body from decomposing in the interval. Joseph had been fully aware of the circumstances of his mother’s death, as well as the fact that Yaakov could not have buried the remains of two sisters both of whom had been his wife, in the cave of Machpelah. The reason why he buried Leah in that cave was that he had, after all, married her first. Rachel died in “Ramah,” hence רמת רחל,” part of the territory of Binyamin after the distribution of the land by Joshua. Our sages who explain all this allegorically, say that Rachel had to die when she entered the Holy Land, in order that Yaakov not become guilty of being married to two sisters both of whom were alive, something that the Torah had forbidden. Yaakov received instructions from on high to bury Rachel where he did, so that her spirit, in due course, could petition G’d when her “children,” would be taken into captivity by the Babylonian general Nebuzaradan. Some commen-tators say that Yaakov explained to Joseph that the reason he had buried his mother on the way to Efrat was that this was within the tribal territory of one of her sons, whereas had she been buried in Machpelah, she would not have been interred in soil belonging to her offspring. Burying her in earth that would belong to the descendants of Leah would not have been something compatible with her dignity.

“Rachel died” [48:7]. Jacob said to Joseph. If you want to ask me why am I burdening you that you should carry me to the land of Canaan to bury me there and not in the land of Egypt? I buried your mother in the field, on the way, where she died, and I did not take her to the cave of our other ancestors, even though she died quite close to the city of Bethlehem and I did not take her there. Certainly, you resent me for this. However, you should know that the Holy One told me to do this, that I should bury her on the way. When Israel will leave Jerusalem for the exile of Nebuzaradon, Israel will pass on that road. Rachel will pray for Israel from her grave and the Holy One will accept her prayer. (Rashi, Genesis, 48:7.) Hizkuni writes. Jacob said: I did not bury Rachel in the cave with me because Esau was still at war with me. I did not have the right of ownership yet for the cave. However, I did bury Leah in the cave. Esau had gone away and left the cave to me alone. Another explanation is that the field where Rachel was buried is part of the land of her children. However, the cave is in the land of the children of Leah, in the land of Judah. It is no honor to live in a strangers land. Another explanation is because Rachel died in childbirth, she was full of blood. If she were to be carried through the fields, she would be jostled and her shrouds would be smeared full of blood. Therefore, I buried Rachel on the way, where she died. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:7.) Hizkuni and Toldot Yizhak question Rashi, who writes. Jacob said: I did not bury Rachel in the land of Canaan. We find that she was indeed buried in the land of Canaan. The explanation is that Jacob said: I did not bury her in a city, but in the field, even though it was close to Bethlehem. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:7; Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 48:6.) Ramban writes. Jacob did not bury Rachel in the cave. He was ashamed that two sisters should lie next to each other and that Jacob should lie near them. People would say that Jacob had married two sisters when they were alive. Therefore, Leah was buried in the cave because she was the first and legitimate wife of Jacob. Jacob should not have married Rachel because she was the sister of Leah. (Ramban, Genesis, 48:7.)

There are some formidable questions here. First, why should souls after leaving their bodies concern themselves with matters such as plague-spots? Second, after having ascertained the Blessed One's ruling to be "clean," how could they maintain "unclean" and require the decision of Rabbah bar Nachmani? In consideration of these two questions, we shall interpret this aggadah in the following manner: It is a clear and acknowledged fact that though the soul is not body nor a faculty of the body, still, its residence in the body makes material impressions upon it to the point that it must reside in a material locale after leaving the body. It follows from this that Gan Eden is in the terrestrial world, for transition from one extreme to another is extremely difficult unless it be effected by degree. And since in the beginning its residence was in a material place alone, it is removed to a middle place between the material and the immaterial. And this constitutes the superiority of Gan Eden to other places, just as the land of Israel is superior to other lands. And this is what is found throughout the Gemara, that when the soul resides in the terrestrial world the body is the locale of its residence, as in the case of (Berachoth 18b): "I am looking for Abba." And we see, too, that for this reason Jacob did not bury Rachel in the land of Israel, even though he was near it, so that when her children passed by there she would pray for them, as it is written (Genesis 48:7): "As for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died in the land of Canaan on the way, when there was but a little way to come to Efrat, and I buried her there on the road to Efrat, which is Bet Lachem." This is by way of self-vindication to Joseph as Rashi explains there in his commentary. And, in truth, his burying Rachel outside the land of Israel so that she should cry for her children when they passed by there is strong indication of the soul's habitat and mooring being in the locale of the body, more so than in any other locales in the terrestrial world. And all this because of its prior residence in the body, which left material impressions upon it. Therefore, it is no wonder if the soul occupies itself with material wisdoms. Add to this the fact that the separate intelligences, by virtue of the effluence constantly streaming in upon them from the Blessed One, must constantly occupy themselves with wisdom. This accounts for the ever-recurring expression in the Gemara, "the study hall of heaven," and for the statement of our sages (Berachoth 64a): "Torah scholars have no rest, neither in this world nor in the next." This being the case, it is not to be wondered at that the soul occupies itself with the subject of plague-spots.

Chapter [51] 52:Torah [1] And God remembered Rachel (Genesis 30:22). This refers to when the God-fearing people spoke to each other (Malachi 3:16). This is Jacob and Rachel, as it is written earlier in the passage, "And Rachel saw that she had not borne children to Jacob and she envied her sister" (Genesis 30:1). Why was she jealous now? When she saw her sister entering her wedding canopy, she was not jealous, but now she was jealous. Why was she jealous? Rather, she was jealous of her good deeds, saying, "If I am not righteous like her, the Holy One, blessed be He, will not give me children before her." Therefore, she was jealous of her actions, as it is written, "Let not your heart be envious of sinners, but be in the fear of the Lord all day long" (Proverbs 23:17). Therefore, Rachel became jealous and said to Jacob, "Give me children, or else I am as good as dead" (Genesis 30:1). A woman who is barren and does not give birth is considered dead, but Rachel said, "If I do not give birth from this righteous man, my father will marry me to a wicked man, and I will die with him in the next world," as it is written, "The wicked man's evil will destroy him" (Psalms 34:22). Therefore, she said, "Or else I am as good as dead." Another interpretation: "Give me children." She said to him, "If you ask for me, I will give birth. When you asked for sheep to give birth, they gave birth," as it is written, "And the flocks mated in front of the rods" (Genesis 30:39). Another interpretation: "Give me children." She said to him, "If you ask for me, I will give birth. Do as your father Isaac did, whose wife was barren, and he prayed for her," as it is written, "And Isaac entreated the Lord for his wife" (Genesis 25:21). Jacob said to her, "Isaac had only one wife, so he prayed for her. But I have four wives. Leah has already given birth. If you do not give birth, Bilhah will give birth instead." She said to him, "If you are not willing to do as Isaac your father did, do as Abraham your grandfather did, who listen to Sarah when she said to him, "Behold, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children" (Genesis 16:2), so you also take my maid Bilhah and come to her (Genesis 30:3). And I will build through her as well, not just Sarah. In addition, what did Rachel see fit to say, "Give me children or else I will die" (Genesis 30:1)? She was prophesying that she would die soon, as it is written, "And as for me, when I came from Paddan, Rachel died on me" (Genesis 48:7). She said to him, "Give me children before I die," as it is written, "Give me children" (Genesis 30:1), immediately Jacob became angry. Is there a God who does nothing but what He desires? I am that God who withheld from you fruit of the womb (Genesis 30:2). I withheld from you, but from me, I have already given you children in abundance. God said to him, "Are you showing kindness to her and saying, 'Is there a God besides me?' As I live, I will cause her to bear a son who will say to his brothers, 'I am above God'" (Genesis 30:19). Indeed, they are talking about these things, as if God inclined His ear and listened and wrote down their words, as it is written, "Then those who feared the Lord spoke to one another" (Malachi 3:16). When the time was right, He took out the Book of Remembrance and remembered her, as it is written, "And God remembered Rachel" (Genesis 30:22).

[3] And God remembered Rachel. This means that her mighty ones stumbled in their journey (Nahum 2:6). Her mighty ones refer to Jacob and Rachel, whom the Holy One, blessed be He, remembered and settled the account that He had promised Abraham. "Thus shall your seed be" (Genesis 15:5). However, they stumbled in their journey, as Jacob said, "With whomever you find your gods, he shall not live" (Genesis 31:32). He went to Rachel and did not know what had happened, and what caused her death on the way, as it says, "And as for me, when I came from Paddan, Rachel died beside me in the land of Canaan on the way" (Genesis 48:7). The phrase "they stumbled in their journey" is compared to a shepherd who saw a wolf entering to snatch a lamb, took a stone to throw at the wolf, and went after the lamb. Similarly, Jacob cursed and thought he was cursing Laban, not knowing that his curse was falling on his own sheep, as it says, "And Jacob did not know" (Genesis 31:32). Therefore, Rachel died on the way, and why did she die in Bethlehem? The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "My children need her there, in the hour when they sin and steal, and she remembers Me just as I remember her," as it says, "Thus says the Lord: A voice is heard in Ramah...Rachel weeping for her children" (Jeremiah 31:15). He said to her, "Restrain your voice from weeping" (Jeremiah 31:16). And what reward does she have for her days being cut short and dying on the way? It is that she remembers Me on behalf of my children, as it says, "There is a reward for your deeds, says the Lord...and your children shall return to their own border" (Jeremiah 31:16-17).

“On the ninth day, prince of the children of Benjamin, Avidan son of Gidoni” (Numbers 7:60). “On the ninth day, prince of the children of Benjamin, Avidan son of Gidoni” – why did Benjamin present his offering after Joseph’s sons? It is because, just as the Divine Presence was in Joseph’s portion in Shilo, so, it rested in Benjamin’s portion in the Temple in Jerusalem. Alternatively, it is based on what the verse said: “Rouse Your might before Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh, and come to our rescue” (Psalms 80:3). (The midrash here is based on the fact that Ephraim and Manasseh cannot be separated; see section 6.) “His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:61). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]…” – do not read it as kaarat, but rather as akeret, corresponding to Rachel, who was the pillar of the household; she was the principal [ikar] of Jacob’s household, as it is stated: “The sons of Rachel, Jacob’s wife: Joseph and Benjamin” (Genesis 46:19). And it says: “Rachel died on me” (Genesis 48:7). “One silver” – as on the basis of her prayer, Benjamin was born, as it is stated: “She called his name Joseph, saying: May the Lord add another son for me” (Genesis 30:24). In her regard it is stated: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20) – the tongue of a righteous woman. “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – as Benjamin was born when Jacob was one hundred years old. That is why he was named Benjamin [Binyamin], (Son of yamin, whose numerical value is: Yod – 10; mem – 40; nun – 50; which sum to 100. In many verses there is only one yod in the word Binyamin.) as he was born when his father was one hundred years old. And he was thirty years old when he descended to Egypt. That is one hundred and thirty. “One silver basin” – it is a basin, it is a goblet, corresponding to Joseph, who assessed the righteousness of his brothers regarding Benjamin by means of the goblet. When Joseph saw that Judah sacrificed himself on behalf of Benjamin, he recognized his brothers’ righteousness and made himself known to them. Because Joseph would drink wine [yayin], whose numerical value is seventy, (Yod – 10; yod – 10; nun – 50; which sum to 70.) from the goblet, therefore, the weight of the basin was “seventy…in the sacred shekel.” “Both of them full” – both of them were equal, Joseph and Benjamin, as the Tabernacle was established in Joseph’s portion in Shilo, and the Temple in Benjamin’s portion in Jerusalem. That is, “high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering.” “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:62). “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” – corresponding to ten sons that Benjamin had when he descended to Egypt, as it is stated: “The sons of Benjamin: Bela, and Bekher, [and Ashbel, Gera, and Naaman, Eḥi, and Rosh, Mupim, and Hupim, and Ard]” (Genesis 46:21), and they were all righteous. That is, “filled with incense.” “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:63). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:64). “One young bull, [one ram, one lamb]” – these are three species of burnt offering corresponding to the three times that the Temple is built in his portion: one in the era of Solomon, one in the era of those who ascended from the exile, and the third, in the Messianic Era. “One goat as a sin offering” – it corresponds to the structure that Herod built, which was built by a sinful king, and whose construction served as atonement for him for having killed the Sages of Israel. (See Bava Batra 4a.) “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Avidan son of Gidoni” (Numbers 7:65). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to two kings who emerged from Benjamin, Saul and Ish Boshet. Alternatively, it corresponds to the two redeemers who emerged from him, Mordekhai and Esther. “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – there are three species, five of each, corresponding to the three advantages of five each that Benjamin received; they were: “Benjamin’s gift was five times greater that the gifts of all of them” (Genesis 43:34). “To Benjamin he gave three hundred pieces of silver, and five changes of garments” (Genesis 45:22). The third, this is Mordekhai, who was from Benjamin, and who was privileged to don five royal garments, as it is stated: “Mordekhai went out from before the king in royal garments of sky-blue and white, with a great golden crown, and a cloak of fine linen and purple wool” (Esther 8:15). “This was the offering of Avidan…” – since he presented the offering in this order, the Holy One blessed be He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Avidan…”

(Genesis 45:8) "So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and He has made me a father to Pharaoh." I am like a creditor to him, as it is stated (Exodus 22:24), "Do not impose interest upon him." Just as the way of a creditor is to lend to a borrower (Proverbs 22:7), in the book of Rabbi Meir, it is written, "And he has made me a father," as it says, "which the Lord, your God, gives you" (Deuteronomy 15:2). This is a legal judgment derived from the full texts written in the Torah, which emerged from Jerusalem during the Sabbatical year and ascended to Rome, and the scrolls were stored in the synagogue of Asvyros. "And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good" (Genesis 1:31). "For a man and his wife, leather tunics" (Genesis 3:21). "I will descend now and see their outcry" (Genesis 18:21). "The Lord who took me from my father's house and from the land of my birth" (Genesis 24:7). "And he sold his birthright" (Genesis 25:33). "Behold, now, I am old; I do not know the day of my death" (Genesis 27:2). "The fragrance of a field that the Lord has blessed" (Genesis 27:27). "And Oholibamah bore Jeush" (Genesis 36:5). "Eliphaz, the son of Esau" (Genesis 36:10). "These were the sons of Oholibamah, the wife of Esau" (Genesis 36:14). "They arose and went down to Egypt" (Genesis 43:15). "And I buried her there on the way" (Genesis 48:7).And he has made me a father to Pharaoh." And here are the names that came down to Egypt (Genesis 46:8). "So shall you say to the children of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel" (Exodus 19:3). "The children of Israel journeyed from Rameses" (Exodus 12:37). "For it is a sign between Me" (Exodus 31:13). "Five for the planks on one side" (Exodus 26:27). "We have no barricade against it." "And the priest shall take from its blood" (Leviticus 4:34), for if it is a lamb. "And when the zav becomes purified with living water" (Leviticus 15:13). "One lamb of the first year without blemish" (Leviticus 14:10). "All who come to join the ranks must be counted in their census" (Numbers 4:3). "From the first of your dough, you shall give" (Numbers 15:20). "Avenge the vengeance of the children of Israel" (Numbers 31:2). "And they came to Moses and to the congregation of the children of Israel" (Numbers 12:1). "The heads of the families of the house of Joseph approached" (Numbers 36:1). "But I have not the power to go up" (Deuteronomy 1:26). "And they shall inherit it, they and all the people of the land" (Numbers 32:22). "To give us into the hands of the Amorites" (Deuteronomy 1:27). "Nor take a mother upon her young" (Deuteronomy 22:6). "Brimstone and salt burning" (Deuteronomy 29:22). "Like the upheaval of Sodom and Gomorrah" (Deuteronomy 29:22). "I said, I would scatter them" (Deuteronomy 32:26). So they are written in the Torah that emerged from Jerusalem.

R. Jochanan (and according to others, R. Elazar), said: "The wife of a man does not die [frequently] unless he is requested to pay [his donation] and has not to pay, as it is said (Prov. 22, 27) If thou have nothing to pay, why should he take away thy bed from under thee?" R. Jochanan said again: "To him whose first wife dies, it is as if the Temple had been destroyed in his days, as it is said (Ezek. 24, 10) I will take away from thee the desire of thy eyes, etc., and (Ib.) And when I had spoken unto the people in the morning, my wife died at evening; and (Ib. 21) I will profane my sanctuary, the pride of your strength, the desire of your eyes." R. Alexandrai said: "To him whose wife dies, the world around him is dark, as it is said (Job 18, 6) The light becometh dark in his tent, and his lamp will be quenched above him." R. Jose b. Chanina said: Also his steps become shortened, as immediately it reads: The steps of his strength shall be narrowed. And R. Abahu said: "Also his advice is no more of use; as the end of the verse cited reads: And his own counsel shall cast him down." Rabba b. b. Chana said in the name of R. Jochanan: "Joining couples is as difficult as the dividing of the Red Sea, as it is said (Ps. 68, 7) God places those who are solitary in the midst of their families: He bringeth out those who are bound unto happiness. Do not read Motzi Assirim (bringeth out those who are bound), but read it K' motzi Assirim (like bringing out those who are bound). Do not read Bakosharoth (into happiness), but read B'chi V'shiruth (weeping and singing); i.e., at the Red Sea they wept first and then sang." Is this so? Has not R. Juda said in the name of Rab: "Forty days before the embryo is formed, a heavenly voice goes forth and says: 'This and that daughter to this and that son.'" This is not difficult to explain. The latter deals with the first marriage, and the former with the second marriage. R. Samuel b. Nachman said: "For everything there may be an exchange, but not for the wife of one's youth, as it is said (Is. 54, 6) And as a wife of one's youth that was rejected." R. Juda taught to his son, R. Isaac: "One can find pleasure only in his first wife, as it is said (Prov. 5, 18) Thy fountain will be blessed; and rejoice with the wife (Ib. b) of thy youth." "Whom do you mean?" his son asked, and he answered: "Your mother." Is that so? Did not R. Juda teach to R. Isaac his son (Ecc. 7, 26) And I find as more bitter than death the woman whose heart is snares and nets, etc? And the latter asked him: "Who, for an example?" He answered: "Like your mother." True, she was irascible, but was easily appeased with a word. R. Samuel b. Unya said in the name of Rab: "A woman [unmarried] is an unfinished vessel, and she makes a covenant with [cares for] none but him who made her a vessel; as it is said (Is. 54, 5) For thy husband is thy master," etc. There is a Baraitha; No one feels the death of a man more than his wife, and no one feels the death of a woman more than her hushaud. No one feels the death of a man more than his wife, as it is said (Ruth 1, 3) Thereupon died Elimelcch, Naomi's husband; and no one feels the death of a woman more than her husband, as it is said (Gen. 48, 7) And as for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died by me.

“It is better that you do not vow, than that you vow and do not pay” (Ecclesiastes 5:4). “It is better that you do not vow” – Rabbi Meir said: Better than both is one who does not vow at all, but rather brings his sheep to the Temple Courtyard, consecrates it, and slaughters it, as it is stated: “If you refrain from vowing, [there will be no sin in you]” (Deuteronomy 23:23). Rabbi Huna said: There was an incident involving one who vowed and did not pay. He set sail in the Mediterranean Sea, and his ship sank in the sea and he died. Rabbi Shmuel said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes for himself that his wife will die, as it is written: “I, when I came from Padan, Rachel died on me…” (Genesis 48:7). Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes [himself] to come to four transgressions: Idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed, and slander, and all of them are derived from Jacob. (While fleeing Esau, Jacob took a vow that he was to fulfill upon his return to Canaan (see Genesis 28:20–22), but he did not fulfill it immediately upon his return.) Idol worship, as it is written: “Remove the foreign gods” (Genesis 35:2). Forbidden sexual relations, as it is written: “That he had defiled Dina his daughter” (Genesis 34:5). Bloodshed, as it is written: “Jacob’s two sons, […each] took [his sword…and killed all the males]” (Genesis 34:25). And slander, as it is written: “He heard the words of Laban’s sons [saying: Jacob has taken everything that was our father’s]” (Genesis 31:1). Rabbi Mana said: Anyone who vows and does not pay causes death to come upon him, as it is stated: “For the Lord your God will demand it of you [and it will be a sin for you]” (Deuteronomy 23:22), and Rabbi Ami said: There is no death without sin, and there is no suffering without iniquity. There is no death without sin, as it is stated: “The soul that sins, it will die” (Ezekiel 18:4). And there is no suffering without iniquity, as it is stated: “I will punish their transgressions with a rod and their iniquity with plagues” (Psalms 89:33).

... [What about all] the praise of Joseph, who exceeded in the honor of his father? And yet he did not enter into him all the time, such that were it not that they came to tell him, "Your father is sick," he would not have known! Rather this is to inform you of his righteousness. For he did not want to be alone with his father, lest he say to him, "How did your brothers act with you?" And [then] he would curse them.... Hence he did not go to his father all the time.)

“Elimelekh Naomi's husband died; she and her two sons remained” (Ruth 1:3). “Elimelekh Naomi's husband died.” It is taught: Everyone will die, and everyone [knows] that he will die. Praiseworthy is the person who has departed from the world with a good name. If a man dies, it is only his wife who misses him, as it is stated: “Elimelekh Naomi's husband died.” If a woman dies, it is only her husband who misses her, as it is stated: “But I, when I came from Paddan, Rachel died on me” (Genesis 48:7). Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Jacob our patriarch said: ‘Rachel’s death was on me, and Rachel’s death was more difficult for me than all the troubles that befell me.’

R. Meir says: She died in the portion of Benjamin, her son, as it is written (Ibid. 48:7) "for when I came from Paden, Rachel died upon me … before Efrath, etc." And Efrath is none other than Bethlehem, viz. (Michah 5:1) "And you, Bethlehem, Efrathah." I might think, in the portion of Joseph, her son; it is, therefore, written (Psalms 132:6) "Behold, we heard of it in Efrath; we found it in the field of the forest" — with him who is compared to an animal of the forest. And who is that? Benjamin, as it is written (Bereshith 49:27) "Benjamin is a wolf that will tear."

“Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord” (Leviticus 27:2). “If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord” – that is what is written: “It is preferable that you do not vow than if you vow and do not pay” (Ecclesiastes 5:4). Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda: Rabbi Meir says: “It is preferable that you do not vow” – but one who vows and pays is better. There is proof for Rabbi Meir from what is stated: “Vow and pay to the Lord your God” (Psalms 76:12). Rabbi Yehuda says: “It is preferable that you do not vow” – and better than both of them (Better than one who vows and does not pay, and one who vows and pays. ) is one who does not vow at all, but rather, brings his lamb to the Temple courtyard, consecrates it, and slaughters it. “If you refrain from vowing, there will be no sin in you” (Deuteronomy 23:23) – Rav Huna said: There was an incident involving one who took a vow but did not pay his vow, and he embarked to sail in the Mediterranean Sea. His ship sunk and he died at sea. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: Anyone who vows but delays fulfilling his vow, ultimately he will come to idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed, and slander. From whom do you derive all this? It is from Jacob; because he vowed and delayed fulfilling his vow, (Jacob’s vow is related in Genesis 28:20–22, and a midrash asserts that he did not fulfill his vow in a timely enough fashion when he returned to the Land of Israel. ) he came to all of them. Idol worship, from where is it derived? “Jacob said to his household…remove the foreign gods [that are in your midst]” (Genesis 35:2). Forbidden sexual relations, from where is it derived? From Dina, as it is stated: “Dina went out.… [and Shekhem…lay with her and violated her]” (Genesis 34:1). Bloodshed, from where is it derived? From that which is stated: “It was on the third day, when they were in pain…[Simeon and Levi…killed all the males]” (Genesis 34:25). Slander, from where is it derived? From that which is stated: “He heard the words of Laban’s sons” (Genesis 31:1). The Rabbis say: Anyone who vows but delays fulfilling his vow buries his wife. That is what is written: “And as for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died on me” (Genesis 48:7). Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak said: Anyone who vows and pays, he has reward for the vow and for the payment, as it is stated: “Vow and pay to the Lord your God” (Psalms 76:12). Anyone who vows and delays fulfillment of his vow causes death to himself, as it is written: “As the Lord your God will demand it from you” (Deuteronomy 23:22) – payment is exacted from you, and not from your property. Rabbi Ami said: There is no death without sin, and there is no suffering without iniquity. There is no death without sin, as it is stated: “The soul that sins, it will die” (Ezekiel 18:4). There is no suffering without iniquity, as it is stated: “I will punish their transgression with a rod, and their iniquity with plague” (Psalms 89:33). Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: Just as regarding vows, there are [the prohibitions:] You shall not profane, (See Numbers 30:3. ) and: You shall not delay, (See Deuteronomy 23:23. ) so, regarding valuations, there are [the prohibitions:] You shall not profane, and: You shall not delay. That is why Moses cautions Israel and says: “If a man articulates a vow in accordance with the valuation of persons to the Lord.” (Moses mentions the term vow in the context of valuations in order to imply that the prohibitions against violating or delaying fulfillment of vows applies to valuations as well. )

This is what the Torah alluded to when it described Jacob as kissing Rachel and raising his voice and beginning to cry (29,11). Rashi comments there that the reason Jacob cried was because he foresaw that Rachel would not be buried alongside him. This comment is difficult. The fact that Rachel would not be buried with Jacob hardly seems an adequate reason for him to cry about! No doubt Rashi meant that Jacob had a vision of the reason that Rachel would not be buried alongside him, that his descendants would be exiled and that she needed to intercede with G–d on their behalf. Rashi gave a somewhat similar commentary in Genesis 48,7, where Jacob justified himself to Joseph for asking to be buried in Machpelah, though he had failed to bury Joseph's mother Rachel there. We see that there is a spiritual association between Rachel and צאן, the description used for the Jewish people when the latter are in exile.

Of course, there was a connection to Rachel in Beit Lechem due to Kever Rachel’s there. (There is considerable controversy as to the true location of Kever Rachel, with many arguing that its true location lies in Binyamin’s portion of Eretz Yisrael, just north of Yerushalayim (for a summary of the debate see https://www.ou.org/torah/files/r-manning-kever-rachel.pdf). The question arises to a great extent since there are more than one city called Beit Lechem in Eretz Yisrael (for this reason the first pasuk in Megillat Rut identifies the city as Beit Lechem Yehuda, meaning the Beit Lechem located in Yehuda, in contrast to Batei Lechem located in the nachalah of other shevatim). Ramban’s (Bereishit 35:16) view that Rachel Imeinu is buried in Beit Lechem Yehuda has emerged as the prevailing view. Advocates of the northern identification (such as the Chizkuni to Bereishit 48:7) might argue that Kever Rachel in Beit Lechem Yehuda is a monument created by the people of Beit Lechem in honor of Rachel when they embraced Rachel as their adoptive mother.) As a result, Da’at Mikra suggests this was a standard bracha recited at weddings in Beit Lechem, not specifically customized to this circumstance.

מתה, the accent is on the first syllable as the verb is in the past tense. When the same verb occurs in the present tense/future tense, as in Genesis 30,1 the accent is on the last syllable. In Genesis 48,7 when Yaakov describes Rachel having died on him, the accent is also on the first syllable.

מתה אנכי, in this verse when the word מתה is in the present tense, the stress is on the last syllable, whereas in Genesis 48,7 where the same word occurs in the past tense, the stress is on the first syllable.

The descendants of Yoseif were two tribes. In place of the tribe of Levi. (Moshe and Yehoshua were commanded that the Levi’im were not to be given a portion of the land. The land was to be divided only among the other eleven tribes. The children of Menashe and Ephraim were counted as two tribes so that the land would be divided by twelve tribes. This came about through the will of Yaakov, who told Yoseif that his two sons, Ephraim and Menashe, would be considered as his own two son, Reuven and Shimon. (See Bereishis 48:7) This is mentioned here to explain how Yehoshua was to divide the land among nine and half tribes, when without Levi, there would be only eight and a half. We are told therefore that Menashe and Ephraim were counted as two tribes, thus this would compensate for the omission of Levi.)

And you, Bethlehem Ephrathah—whence David emanated, as it is stated (I Sam. 17:58): “The son of your bondsman, Jesse the Bethlehemite.” And Bethlehem is called Ephrath, as it is said (Gen. 48: 7): “On the road to Ephrath, that is Bethlehem.”

Ephrathites. Important people, and similarly, “the son of Tochu, the son of Tzuph, an Ephrathite,” (I Shmuel 1:1. ) [meaning] an aristocrat. Look how important they were, for Eglon the King of Mo’av married off his daughter to Machlon, as the Master said, “Rus was the daughter of Eglon.” (Maseches Sanhedrin 105b. ) Another explanation of “Ephratites,” [they were from Beis Lechem,] because Beis Lechem is called Ephros. (See Bereishis 48:7, “and I buried her [Rachel] on the way to Ephros which is Beis Lechem.” )

Benjamin’s life began with Rachel’s death, so we begin our tour in Eretz Binyamin by exploring a popular contender for the site of Rachel’s burial. For many hundreds of years, tradition assigned a tomb south of Jerusalem, on the road passing Bethlehem and heading down to biblical Ephrath in the naĥalah of Judah, as the burial spot of Rachel. That site satisfies the descriptive verse in Genesis 35:17–19: (Also Genesis 48:7.)

How, though, was Rachel’s voice heard from Ramah (er-Ram, located four kilometers/two and a half miles north of Jerusalem, squarely in Naĥalat Binyamin), when she was buried in the famous Kever Rachel next to ancient Bethlehem? More urgently: given that Rachel was not buried in the family tomb of Me’arat HaMakhpelah in Hebron, shouldn’t we expect her grave to be found in one of her own sons’ naĥalot, rather than in Naĥalat Yehudah? (Sifrei, Deuteronomy 33:12. Also Ĥizkuni, Genesis 48:7.)

Samuel and Saul were in Ramah. From there, Saul was to make his way to Gibeath-elohim, in Benjamin, (Given the multitude of eponyms built off of the root g-b-’ (Geba, Gibeah, Geba Benjamin, Gibeah of Benjamin, Gibeah of Saul, Gibeon, and Gibeath-elohim), it is highly probable some of these names refer to a single place. Gibeath-elohim is identified as Gibeon by Aaron Demsky (“Geba, Gibeah and Gibeon – An Historico-Geographic Riddle,” BASOR 212 [1973]: 26–31). Demsky’s opinion is rejected by Patrick Arnold in favor of an identification of Gibeath-elohim with Gibeah (Gibeah: The Search for a Biblical City [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990], 28). All of the g-b-’ sites listed above are located in Naĥalat Binyamin.) by way of Kever Rachel, located in Zelzah – identified as a site on Benjamin’s border. On his way to Gibeath-elohim, he was to meet three men who were heading north to Beth-el. This is quite an accumulation of evidence for an alternate site for the burial of Rachel: (a) Saul was headed to a location north of Jerusalem (Gibeath-elohim), he was to meet people who were also headed north (to Beth-el), and was also to meet in the interim with men at Kever Rachel, located near or in Benjamin’s border; (b) “the voice of Rachel is heard in Ramah, crying bitterly for her children,” and Ramah was north of Jerusalem in Naĥalat Binyamin; and (c) sheer poetic justice demands that she be buried in the naĥalah of the son she died birthing. All this combines to make a compelling case for us to seek out Kever Rachel in Naĥalat Binyamin. (This is the opinion of Ramban and Ĥizkuni (on Genesis 48:7).)

Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: If a bone was stuck in his throat he puts of the same kind on top of his head and this is not of ways of the Emorite (Addition of G which here becomes illegible.) . Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob stated: you shall neither divine nor use incantations (Lev. 19:26.) . Even through there is no divining there are signs, but only after three portents (If something happened to a person three times he may assume that he is prone to this kind of accident, as Jacob feared for Benjamin’s life because he already had lost a wife and two sons.) ; for example when I came from Padan, Rachel died on me (Gen. 48:7.) ; Joseph is no more, Simeon is no more, and you want to take Benjamin (Gen. 42:36.) , etc

It is taught in a baraita: A man dies only to his wife, i.e., it is primarily she who suffers the pain and sadness resulting from his death, and a woman dies only to her husband. A man dies only to his wife, as it is stated: “And Elimelech, Naomi’s husband, died” (Ruth 1:3), and a woman dies only to her husband, as it is stated in Jacob’s parting words to Joseph: “And as for me, when I came from Paddan, Rachel died on me” (Genesis 48:7).

(This verse is labeled as 30.25 in some editions.) At that time—declares GOD—I will be God to all the clans of Israel, and they shall be My people. Thus said GOD: The people escaped from the sword, Found favor in the wilderness; When Israel was marching homeward GOD was revealed (revealed Heb. adds “to me”; emendation yields “to him.”) long ago. Eternal love I conceived for you then; Therefore I continue My grace to you. I will build you firmly again, O Maiden Israel! Again you shall take up your hand-drums (you shall take up your hand-drums See note at Exod. 15.20.) And go forth to the rhythm of the dancers. Again you shall plant vineyards On the hills of Samaria; You (You Heb. “They.”) shall plant and live to enjoy the fruit. For the day is coming when watchmen Shall proclaim on the heights of Ephraim: Come, let us go up to Zion, To the ETERNAL our God! For thus said GOD: Cry out in joy for Jacob, Shout at the crossroads (crossroads Lit. “head.”) of the nations! Sing aloud in praise, and say: Save, O ETERNAL One, Your people, (Save, O ETERNAL One, Your people Emendation yields “GOD has saved this people.”) The remnant of Israel. I will bring them in from the northland, Gather them from the ends of the earth— The blind and the lame among them, Those with child and those in labor— In a vast throng they shall return here. They shall come with weeping, And with compassion (compassion For this meaning, cf. Zech. 12.10.) will I guide them. I will lead them to streams of water, By a level road where they will not stumble. For I am ever a Father (Father See note at 3.19.) to Israel, Ephraim is My first-born. Hear the word of GOD, O nations, And tell it in the isles afar. Say: The One who scattered Israel will gather them, And will guard them as a shepherd his flock. For GOD will ransom Jacob, Redeem him from one too strong for him. They shall come and shout on the heights of Zion, Radiant over GOD’s bounty— Over new grain and wine and oil, And over sheep and cattle. They shall fare like a watered garden, They shall never languish again. Then shall maidens dance gaily, Young men and old alike. I will turn their mourning to joy, I will comfort them and cheer them in their grief. I will give the priests their fill of fatness, And My people shall enjoy My full bounty —declares GOD. Thus said GOD: A cry is heard in Ramah (in Ramah Or “on a height.”) — Wailing, bitter weeping— Rachel weeping for her children. She refuses to be comforted For her children, who are gone. Thus said GOD: Restrain your voice from weeping, Your eyes from shedding tears; For there is a reward for your labor —declares GOD: They shall return from the enemy’s land. And there is hope for your future —declares GOD: Your children shall return to their country. I can hear Ephraim lamenting: “You have chastised me, and I am chastised Like a calf that has not been broken. Receive me back, let me return, For You, O ETERNAL One, are my God. Now that I have turned back, I am filled with remorse; Now that I am made aware, I strike my thigh. (strike my thigh A gesture of self-reproach.) I am ashamed and humiliated, For I bear the disgrace of my youth.” Truly, Ephraim is a dear son to Me, A child that is dandled! Whenever I have turned (turned Lit. “spoken.”) against him, My thoughts would dwell on him still. That is why My heart yearns for him; I will receive him back in love —declares GOD. Erect markers, Set up signposts; (signposts Meaning of Heb. uncertain.) Keep in mind the highway, The road that you traveled. Return, Maiden Israel! Return to these towns of yours! How long will you waver, O rebellious daughter? (For GOD has created something new on earth: A woman courts (courts Meaning of Heb. uncertain.) a man.) Thus said GOD of Hosts, the God of Israel: They shall again say this in the land of Judah and in its towns, when I restore their fortunes: “ GOD bless you, Abode of righteousness, O holy mountain!” Judah and all its towns alike shall be inhabited by the farmers and such as move about (such as move about Lit. “they shall travel.”) with the flocks. For I will give the thirsty abundant drink, and satisfy all who languish. At this I awoke and looked about, and my sleep (my sleep I.e., the vision in the preceding verses.) had been pleasant to me. See, a time is coming—declares GOD—when I will sow the House of Israel and the House of Judah with seed of people and seed of cattle; and just as I was watchful over them to uproot and to pull down, to overthrow and to destroy and to bring disaster, so I will be watchful over them to build and to plant—declares GOD. In those days, they shall no longer say, “Parents have eaten sour grapes and children’s teeth are blunted.” (blunted In contrast to others “set on edge.”) But every one shall die for their own sins: whosoever eats sour grapes, their teeth shall be blunted. See, a time is coming—declares GOD—when I will make a new covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors, when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, a covenant that they broke, though I espoused (espoused Meaning of Heb. uncertain; compare 3.14.) them—declares GOD. But such is the covenant I will make with the House of Israel after these days—declares GOD: I will put My Teaching into their inmost being and inscribe it upon their hearts. Then I will be their God, and they shall be My people. No longer will they need to teach one another and say to one another, “Heed GOD”; for all of them, from the least of them to the greatest, shall heed Me—declares GOD. For I will forgive their iniquities, And remember their sins no more. Thus said GOD, Who established the sun for light by day, The laws of moon and stars for light by night, Who stirs up the sea into roaring waves, Whose name is GOD of Hosts: If these laws should ever be annulled by Me —declares GOD— Only then would the offspring of Israel cease To be a nation before Me for all time. Thus said GOD: If the heavens above could be measured, and the foundations of the earth below could be fathomed, only then would I reject all the offspring of Israel for all that they have done—declares GOD. See, a time is coming—declares GOD—when the city shall be rebuilt for GOD from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate; and the measuring line shall go straight out to the Gareb Hill, and then turn toward Goah. And the entire Valley of the Corpses and Ashes, and all the fields as far as the Wadi Kidron, and the corner of the Horse Gate on the east, shall be holy to GOD. They shall never again be uprooted or overthrown.

And I, when I came from Padan, Rochel died unto me in the land of Canaan, on the road, when there was yet a stretch of land, before coming to Ephros. I buried her there on the road to Ephros, which is Beis Lechem.

And I beseech thee to bury me with my fathers. Rahel died by me suddenly in the land of Kenaan, while there was yet much ground to come to Ephrath; nor could I carry her to bury her in the Double Cave, but I buried her there, in the way of Ephrath which is Bethlechem.

ויאמר, ״מי אלה?״, he said: “who are these?” According to the plain meaning of the text, Yaakov’s eyesight had been dimmed so that he could not recognise their facial features; This is why the Torah added that his failing eyesight was due to old age, (verse 10) If you were to counter that the Torah had described Yaakov just before as “seeing the sons of Joseph,” (verse 8) this was not sufficient to be able to identify them individually. He had no trouble indentifying Joseph as he recognised him by his voice.

[AND ISRAEL BEHELD JOSEPH’S SONS.] After stating in our verse, And Israel beheld Joseph’s sons, how could Scripture go on to say, Now the eyes of Israel were dim for age, so that he could not see (v. 10)? The answer is, so that he could not see means he was not able to see clearly and recognize their faces.

וירא ישראל את בני יוסף, Israel saw the sons of Joseph, etc. It is difficult to understand how Jacob failed to recognise grand-sons whom he had tutored for the last 17 years on a regular and frequent basis. Tanchuma on our portion explains that Jacob saw with his mental eye that in the future some evil people would come out of Menashe. This is homiletics, of course. We need to be able to explain the plain meaning of the verse also, and this is why the Torah reveals here that Jacob's eyesight had begun to fail him so that he could not see clearly and recognise people. Hence, although Jacob was aware that in addition to Joseph with whom he was speaking two other human beings were standing in front of him, he had recognised Joseph because he had been told in verse 2 that Joseph had come to visit him. He did not recognise Joseph's sons, however, and this is why he asked who they were.

It is also possible that Jacob wanted to arouse feelings of love in the heart of the children's father before he commenced to bless them. In such circumstances the effectiveness of the blessing is enhanced. By asking מי אלה, Jacob was sure he would elicit the response of a proud father, someone who loved his children.

וירא ישראל את בני יוסף “Yisrael saw the sons of Joseph, etc.” The word “he saw” in this verse is to be understood as a vision; he did not see them physically. We have already been told כי לא יכול לראות, “for he was unable to see.” (verse 10) מי אלה, “who are these? How can they qualify for a blessing?” He foresaw at that moment that Jerobam, a future descendant of Ephrayim, would erect two golden calves of whom it was said: “these are your gods O Israel” (Exodus 32,8). He also foresaw that Yehu and his sons would be descendants of Menashe. To this question Joseph replied: בני הם אשר נתן לי אלוקים בזה, “they are my sons whom G’d has given me here.” Joseph mentioned the name of the Lord who had performed miracles for him and had raised him to the position of king so that he had been given this woman as a wife by Pharaoh. This wife had born these children for him. Targum Yonatan explains the word בזה to mean that he showed his father his marriage certificate, כתובה.

וירא, he saw them from a distance and was unable to make out who they were due to his failing eyesight. This is why, even when they were already quite close to him, he had to ask: “who are these lads?”

וירא ישראל, even though we have been told that Yaakov could not see well due to his age (verse 10), it is possible for people whose eyesight has become dimmed to recognise the silhouette of a person without being able to distinguish his facial features sufficiently to identify them. When G’d told Moses that it was impossible for man to “see” Him (Exodus 33,20), He did not mean that man is unable to see any aspect of G’d. This is why the prophet Michyahu could claim to have “seen” G’d (Kings I 22,19) without this being a contradiction to what is written in Exodus 33,20. [thus invalidating King Menashe ordering the execution of the prophet Isaiah for being a false prophet based on his saying that he had “seen” (Isaiah 6,1) G’d. Ed.]

וירא ישראל את בני יוסף AND ISRAEL SAW JOSEPH’S SONS — he wished to bless them but the Divine Presence departed from him because he saw that from Ephraim would be born the wicked kings Jeroboam and Ahab, and from Manasseh Jehu and his sous (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 6).

ויאמר מי אלה AND HE SAID “WHO ARE THESE?” — Whence come these who are unfitted for blessing?

וירא ישראל את בני יוסף, he recognised them as human beings, but did not recognise them for who they were.

He attempted to bless them, but the Divine Presence departed from him... Rashi is answering the question: Why is it written ‘Who are these?” Did Yaakov not recognize that they were Menasheh and Ephraim? Alternatively, Rashi is answering the question: [How can it say,] “Yisrael saw”? It is written right afterward (v. 10), “Yisrael’s eyes were heavy ... he could not see.” Thus Rashi explains, “He attempted to bless them but the Divine Presence departed from him...” Accordingly, “Yaakov saw” means he saw through ruach hakodesh, as [Rashi explained on], “Yaakov saw that food was being sold in Egypt” (42:1).

Israel saw Joseph’s sons, and he said: Who are these? Perhaps due to the distance between Joseph’s and Jacob’s places of residence, Jacob did not see his grandchildren very often, and therefore he did not recognize them. Although he had met them a few years earlier, their appearances had certainly changed in the meantime. Moreover, Jacob’s vision had deteriorated (verse 10), which may be why he did not immediately identify his grandsons.

ויאמר מי אלה, He said: “who are these?” According to the plain meaning of the text, Yaakov’s eyesight was failing to the extent that he no longer recognised his grandchildren, especially those who did not live in Goshen.

“Israel saw the sons of Joseph” [48:8]. Hizkuni writes. Jacob could not see, so how did he see Joseph’s children? The explanation is that he understood with his intellect that these were the children of Joseph. He recognized Joseph by his voice. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:8.) Jacob wanted to bless the children, but prophecy departed from Jacob, since Jeroboam and Ahab, two evil kings, would be descended from Ephraim. King Jehu and his evil children would be descended from Menashe. Jacob said to Joseph. Who are these children that they are not worthy to be blessed? Joseph said: I had them properly, with kiddushin and ketubah, and showed him the ketubah. (I.e., his marriage was completely according to Jewish tradition.) Joseph immediately prayed, and the prophecy again returned to Jacob. Jacob said to Joseph. Bring them here and I will bless them. (Rashi, Genesis, 48:8.)

[2] "And another explanation: Ephraim is a dear son to me. As it says (Hosea 11:3), "I taught Ephraim to walk." The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "I carried him and held him by his arms. When Jacob took him between his arms, as it is said (Genesis 48:13), "And Joseph took them both." Now what is written afterwards (Genesis 48:8)? "And Israel saw Joseph's sons, and said, 'Who are these?'" What did Jacob see that he asked, "Who are these?" He already knew them, as it is said (Genesis 48:5), "And now your two sons." Rather, our father Jacob foresaw that a descendant of Ephraim, namely Jeroboam son of Nebat the Ephraimite, would make two golden calves, as it is said (1 Kings 11:26), "And Jeroboam son of Nebat, an Ephraimite, took his stand." He would then say (1 Kings 12:28), "These are your gods, O Israel." Therefore, Jacob said, "Who are these?" And Joseph replied (Genesis 48:9), "These are my sons." What did Joseph do? He removed his crown from his head and released his belt (or "girdle") before Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 48:12), "And Joseph took them both." He said to him, "Do you see what sins they will commit?" Jacob answered, "I do not." Once he heard this, Joseph said to him (Genesis 48:9), "Bring them to me and I will bless them." Immediately Joseph took them both (Genesis 48:13), and Israel stretched out his right hand. When Joseph saw this, he was displeased, as it is said (Genesis 48:17), "And Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand." He said to him, "Do you think that I have no strength left in my old age? By your life, I still have as much strength as they do." But his father refused (Genesis 48:19)." "And from Menasheh fell [to] David, etc. (I Chronicles 12:20). However, his brother etc. (Genesis 48:19), this is Yehoshua who stands from Ephraim, as it says, "from the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea, son of Nun" (Numbers 13:8), who erected the wall, and all the nations of the world look and see. Therefore, "and his seed shall become a multitude of nations" (Genesis 48:19). The Holy One Blessed be He said, "I have seen how good Ephraim is; take them on my arms" (Hosea 11:3). When The Holy One Blessed be He said said, "Bring them to me" (Genesis 48:9), I was there and revealed a mystery to Jacob about Ephraim and Jeroboam, although they did not know that I had healed them (Hosea 11:3). Ephraim, the beloved son, is dear to me.

You will do well to read what I have written on Genesis 48,8 where Jacob asked Joseph who the two lads were whom he had brought to be blessed. Moses' display of love for the Jewish people is part of his many outstanding characteristics.

ותכהינה עיניו, just as what happened to the High Priest Eli who had not protested the wrongs committed by his sons. (Samuel I 3,13) In that instance the expression used is ועיניו קמה ולא יכול לראות, (Samuel I 4,15) Neither Avraham nor Yaakov experienced such problems in their old age at the age at which Yitzchok was struck by this affliction. They were both far older than Eli who died at the age of only 98. In fact, the Torah reports Avraham’s youthfulness in 25,1 when it reports him as taking another wife. Yaakov, with all the troubles he had experienced during his life was still able to see at 147 years of age, though with difficulty, (may be was very shortsighted then) as in Genesis 48,8 he is reported as clearly seeing Joseph’s sons, though they may have resembled each other so that he could not tell apart which one was Efrayim and which one was Menashe, This was in spite of the Torah (48,10) having told us ועיני ישראל כבדו מזוקן, “Yaakov’s eyes were heavy with old age,” (problems keeping the lids open?) At any rate, he could see, though not with clarity.

התחת אלוקים אני, while it is true that I am a judge, a surrogate of His, charged with the task of carrying out His decrees, and I could punish anyone who was empowered by Him to carry out His decrees. This is analogous to the principle that one court must not annul the rulings of a previous court on the same subject.” (Eduyot 1:5) It is true that you had been charged by G’d to carry out His decrees, but you did not send me here deliberately but G’d. (Genesis 48:8)

“Israel saw the sons of Joseph” [48:8]. Hizkuni writes. Jacob could not see, so how did he see Joseph’s children? The explanation is that he understood with his intellect that these were the children of Joseph. He recognized Joseph by his voice. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:8.)

Yisrael saw Yoseif’s sons, and he said, Who are these?

And Israel looked at the sons of Joseph and said, From whom are these born to thee?

אשר נתן לי אלוקים בזה, “whom G-d has given me in this land.” They were born to me before you came down to Egypt so that you should include them in the list of the twelve tribes. This is why Yaakov responded by telling Joseph that as far as he was concerned Joseph’s sons Ephrayim and Menashe would be just like Reuven and Shimon for him (Verse 5). Joseph explains that this is why he brought them with him.

אשר נתן לי אלוקים בזה, "whom G'd has granted me here." Righteous people do not let an opportunity go by without acknowledging that anything they have received was a gift of G'd. We find an example of Jacob having done the same in Genesis 33,5.

The reason Joseph added the words בזה, "in this place," was that he was grateful that even while he was in exile G'd had shown him favour. Moreover, we have learned in Sotah 36 that Joseph had been meant to beget twelve tribes but that the fact that he almost succumbed to the temptation of sleeping with the wife of Potiphar resulted in his begetting only two of the twelve tribes. The word ב־זה is an allusion to this. The letter =2ב, whereas the numerical value of the word זה is 12. The word therefore alerts us to the tradition that he had only two children instead of twelve. Joseph added the word אלוקים, which describes G'd as the judge of our actions. Joseph acknowledged the fairness of G'd's decision by ascribing the number of children he had been granted to אלוקים.

בזה. As if the Torah had written במקום הזה, “in this place.” The brief בזה, also appears in the same sense already in 38,21 לא היתה בזה קדשה, “no harlot has been in this place, the word for “place,” מקום, being omitted.

WHOM G-D HATH GIVEN ME HERE. It was really not necessary for Joseph to inform his father that his two sons were born to him in Egypt since when Joseph left him he had no wife and children, and Jacob himself had previously said to him, Thy two sons, who were born unto thee in the land of Egypt. (Verse 5 here. Why then was it necessary for Joseph to tell his father, They are my sons, whom G-d hath given me here?) It appears to me that the meaning of the word bazeh (here) is “in this matter concerning which you have spoken,” i.e., “G-d gave them to me before you came to Egypt to me, and they are the ones concerning whom you have said that they are yours.” (See Verse 5 here.) A similar use of the word bazeh is found in the verse, In this way (‘u’bazeh’) the maiden came to the king. (Esther 2:13. Meaning that she came in this manner specified above. (Ibid., Verse 12).) Now Joseph said, G-d hath given me, meaning that “G-d had performed miracles for me until the king gave me this wife, and I have these children from her.”

בזה; in this kingdom.

בָּזֶה IN THIS PLACE (literally, by this, or by means of this) — He showed him the contract of betrothal and the contract of marriage (evidence that their mother had adopted the faith of Israel, and that his and her offspring were of their faith) and Joseph prayed to God about the matter and the Holy Spirit again rested upon him (Jacob) (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 6).

ויאמר קחם נא אלי ואברכם AND HE SAID, BRING THEM, I PRAY THEE, UNTO ME, AND I WILL BLESS THEM — It is to this that the text alludes, (Hosea 11:3) “And I, תרגלתי לאפרים taking them (קחם) upon his arms”, meaning, I made My Spirit once again a familiar thing (תרגלתי) in Jacob for Ephraim’s sake until he took them (him and Manasseh) upon his arms (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 6).

קחם נא אלי: wenn dasjenige, was wir jemandem bringen, durch diese Hingabe für uns selbst eine neue Weihe erhält, drückt sich dieser Gedanke durch לקח אל־ aus, wie ויקחו לי תרומה. Indem du sie mir bringst, gewinnst du deine Söhne doppelt. Es liegt darin die ganze Innigkeit des Gefühls, das ein Sohn empfinden muss, der das Glück hat, seine Kinder seinem alten Vater zum Segnen hinzubringen. Mit V. 8 tritt der Name Jisrael ein. Es ist der Stammvater des künftigen Volkes, der vom Gottesgeiste gehoben, die Enkel für ihre Stellung in der nationalen Zukunft seines Volkes segnet.

בני הם אשר נתן לי אלוקים בזה. My sons, but not my grandsons. These are the sons G’d granted me while I was here, alone, without any member of my family. as you said when you spoke about “those whom you had before I came to Egypt.” They are the ones of whom you said: “לי הם,” “they are mine.”

He showed him his betrothal and marriage contracts... Question: Why did Yoseif show him the betrothal contract, and then pray? Why not the other way around? The answer is: At first he thought Yaakov did not want to bless them because they were born out of wedlock and were illegitimate children. So he showed him the contract, [proving] they were legitimate children. When he saw that Yaakov still did not bless them, he figured that surely ruach hakodesh must have left him, and he prayed for compassion. (Maharshal)

Joseph said to his father: They are my sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, whom you mentioned previously, whom God has given me here. Jacob subsequently remembers and identifies the boys. Despite his physical impairment, his mental capacities were still fully intact. Therefore, he said decisively: Please take them to me, and I will bless them.

בני אשר נתן לי אלוקים בדה, “they are my sons whom the Lord gave me here.” There had been no need for Joseph to tell his father that these children had been born in Egypt, for Yaakov was not only aware of this but had already referred to them in verse 5 as the two sons who had been born for him in Egypt. The whole point Joseph was making was that these were the sons who had been given to him by G’d even before his father had come to Egypt. Yaakov had said that he considered them as his own sons, (not only as his grandchildren)

Similarly, the remediation of any creation requires an effluence reaching it and effecting such remediation through agents of which we have no knowledge. But when this remediation comes through a supplicant, it would seem that this supplicant himself is a mediating agent through which the effluence comes to rest upon the object of his supplications. For this reason, when Eliyahu brought back to life the son of the widow of Zarefat (I Kings 17:21), he stretched himself out upon him three times, the boy's substance thereby being readapted for the reception of life. And Elisha, too, when he brought back to life the son of the Shunamite woman (II Kings 4:34), lay down upon him and placed his mouth to his mouth, instructing first (Ibid 29): "and lay my staff upon the face of the child." And Jacob, likewise, said (Genesis 48:9): "Take them to me and I will bless them," and he placed his hands upon them. All of this demonstrates that the effluence is conditioned for the object of the blessing through the agency of him who pronounces the blessing or the prayer, for which reason it is desirable that the first be in close proximity to the second or even in contact with him if possible.

[2] "And another explanation: Ephraim is a dear son to me. As it says (Hosea 11:3), "I taught Ephraim to walk." The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "I carried him and held him by his arms. When Jacob took him between his arms, as it is said (Genesis 48:13), "And Joseph took them both." Now what is written afterwards (Genesis 48:8)? "And Israel saw Joseph's sons, and said, 'Who are these?'" What did Jacob see that he asked, "Who are these?" He already knew them, as it is said (Genesis 48:5), "And now your two sons." Rather, our father Jacob foresaw that a descendant of Ephraim, namely Jeroboam son of Nebat the Ephraimite, would make two golden calves, as it is said (1 Kings 11:26), "And Jeroboam son of Nebat, an Ephraimite, took his stand." He would then say (1 Kings 12:28), "These are your gods, O Israel." Therefore, Jacob said, "Who are these?" And Joseph replied (Genesis 48:9), "These are my sons." What did Joseph do? He removed his crown from his head and released his belt (or "girdle") before Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 48:12), "And Joseph took them both." He said to him, "Do you see what sins they will commit?" Jacob answered, "I do not." Once he heard this, Joseph said to him (Genesis 48:9), "Bring them to me and I will bless them." Immediately Joseph took them both (Genesis 48:13), and Israel stretched out his right hand. When Joseph saw this, he was displeased, as it is said (Genesis 48:17), "And Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand." He said to him, "Do you think that I have no strength left in my old age? By your life, I still have as much strength as they do." But his father refused (Genesis 48:19)." "And from Menasheh fell [to] David, etc. (I Chronicles 12:20). However, his brother etc. (Genesis 48:19), this is Yehoshua who stands from Ephraim, as it says, "from the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea, son of Nun" (Numbers 13:8), who erected the wall, and all the nations of the world look and see. Therefore, "and his seed shall become a multitude of nations" (Genesis 48:19). The Holy One Blessed be He said, "I have seen how good Ephraim is; take them on my arms" (Hosea 11:3). When The Holy One Blessed be He said said, "Bring them to me" (Genesis 48:9), I was there and revealed a mystery to Jacob about Ephraim and Jeroboam, although they did not know that I had healed them (Hosea 11:3). Ephraim, the beloved son, is dear to me.

Variantly: "And Israel sat in Shittim": in the place of sitoth ("straying" [from the L-rd]). When Israel were in the desert, a place devoid of seed, figs, wine, and pomegranates, they came and waged war against Sichon and Og, who fell into their hands, and they took all that was theirs. That kinG-dom was proud and haughty, though they had only four provinces worthy of the name — Asia, Alexandria, Carthaginia, and Antiochia, while these (Sichon and Og) had sixty cities, all worthy of "kingdom," viz. (Devarim 3:4) "… sixty cities, the entire province of the palace, the kingdom of Og in the Bashan." Israel came and waged war against them and they fell into their (Israel's) hands. But when Israel was surfeited with the spoils, they began "spoiling" the spoils — they tore apart garments and cast them away and tore apart beasts and cast them away — for they sought only vessels of silver and gold, viz. (Devarim 3:7) "and every beast and the spoil of the cities we 'spoiled' unto ourselves." "They came and sat in Shittim," in the place of sitoth. At that time Ammonim and Moavim arose and built markets for themselves from Beth Hayeshimoth until Har Hashaleg, where they installed harlots, old ones outside and young ones within, who sold flaxen garments. When an Israelite would eat and drink and make merry and go out to promenade and to buy something from the old one, she would offer it to him at cost, whereupon the young one would call out to him from within, saying "Come and buy it for less," and he did so. The same, the next day and the day after. The third day she would say to him "Come inside and pick for yourself — you're like one of the family." He obliged. The pitcher near her was full of Ammoni wine, the wine of idolators having not yet been forbidden to Israelites. She: "Would you like to drink some wine?" He obliged, and when the wine burned in him he said to her "Consent to me," at which she took an image of Peor from under her breast-band and said to him: "My master, if you want me to consent to you, bow down to this." He: "Can I bow down to idolatry?" She: "What difference does it make to you? I am only asking that you bare yourself before him." (The sages ruled that baring oneself to Peor is its mode of worship.) The wine burned in him and he said "Consent to me." She: "If you want me to consent to you, 'veer off' from the Torah of Moses." And he did so, as it is written (Hoshea 10:10) "They veered off to shame (i.e., to idolatry); and they became detestable (to Me) in loving (the daughters of Moav)." In the end, they reverted to (their practice of) making idolatrous banquets for them to which they invited them, as it is written (Bamidbar 25:2) "And they (the Moavite women) called the people to the sacrifices of their gods, etc." R. Elazar b. Shamua says: Just as a nail cannot be removed from a door without wood (attached), so, an Israel cannot leave Peor without souls (i.e., without adhesions thereof). Once, Pinchas from the district of Ariach was rolling (wine-) jars, when the spirit of Peor assaulted him, whereupon he brandished the spit against it and it fled. It returned to him the second night, saying "Why did you curse me." Pinchas: "I won't do it again." Once, Sabbatia of Ullas hired out his donkey to a gentile woman. When she came to the outskirts of the province, she said to him: "Wait until I bare myself in its temple." After she left, he said to her "Wait for me until I go in and do as you did." She: "But you are a Jew!" He: "What difference does it make to you?" He went in, (did his "devotions,") and wiped himself on the nose of Peor — whereupon the gentiles praised him, saying "No one ever equaled you in this (worship)." Once, a governor came from abroad to bow down to Peor. When he said to them "Bring a bullock or a ram, which we sacrifice to it," they said to him "We don't worship him in that manner. All you have to do is bare yourself before it" — whereupon he loosed his cohorts upon them, who split their skulls, (the governor) saying "Woe unto you and to your error!" Not so, (i.e., not as the governor) the Israelites, of whom it is written (Bamidbar 25:3) "And Israel attached itself to Ba'al Peor (at that time) and the L-rd was wroth with Israel." (4) "And the L-rd said to Moses: Take all the heads (i.e., judges of the people, and hang them (the Peor worshippers) up … in the face of the sun." (5) "And Moses said to the judges of Israel: Slay each (of you) his (two) men that have joined themselves to Ba'al Peor." The tribe of Shimon came to Zimri: "You are sitting in peace while we are being slaughtered!" — whereupon he gathered 24,000 of his tribe, came to Kozbi, and said to her: "Consent to me." She: I will consent only to the greatest of you, (someone) like Moses your master." He: "I, too, am the chief of a tribe. And, what is more, I am greater than he, (Shimon) being second (of the womb of Leah), while he (Levi) is (only) third," saying which he seized her and stood her in the midst of all of Israel, viz. (Ibid. 6) "And, behold, a man of the children of Israel came, and he brought near to his brothers the Midianite woman in the sight of Moses and in the sight of the entire congregation of the children of Israel, and they wept at the door of the tent of meeting." At that time Pinchas cried out "Is there no one here who is ready to kill and to be killed! Where are the lions?" (Bereshit 48:9) "A lion's whelp is Judah," (Devarim 33:32) "Dan is a lion's whelp" — whereupon he began to shout. Seeing that all remained silent, he arose from his sanhedrin, took out his spear and placed it (i.e., the blade) in his (hollow) belt, supported himself on its haft, and left. (Seeing him about to enter her tent,) they called out to him "Pinchas, where are you going?" He replied: "Is Levi always to be greater than Shimon?" ("Zimri can do it, so can I,") — at which they said "Let him go in" — whereupon the perushim (the "devout" among them) permitted the thing. Once he entered, the L-rd performed six miracles: the first: Normally they would have separated (upon his entrance), but the angel kept them joined. The second: The angel sealed their mouths so that they could not cry out. The third: He transfixed them (with the spear) in their (conjoined) genitals, for the "benefit" of the skeptics, so that they not deny their cohabitation and maintain that he had gone in for the same purpose. The fourth: They did not slide off from the spear but remained in their places. The fifth: The angel lifted the lintel so that they both could appear to all slung from his shoulders. The sixth: When he left, the men of his (Zimri's) tribe, rose up to kill him, and the angel fought them off. When Pinchas saw that too much havoc was being wrought by the angel, he cast them to the ground and stood up and intervened, viz. (Psalms 106:30-31) "And Pinchas arose and intervened, and the plague ceased, and it was reckoned to his merit." And six more miracles were performed for him: The seventh: The blade of the spear was lengthened until it transfixed both bodies and projected upwards. The eighth: The arm of Pinchas was strengthened (to support such a burden). The ninth: The haft did not break. The tenth: Their blood did not descend on Pinchas so that he not become tamei. The eleventh: The Holy One Blessed be He kept them alive so that they not die and cause Pinchas to become tamei. The twelfth: The uppermost (to be thrust through) is the lower on the spear (when it is lifted), but in this instance, Zimri was overturned upon Kozbi, as in the act, so that all of Israel could see that their death was ordained.

Now to a more detailed examination of the subject of betrothal and wedding. The sanctification of the moon is an expression of Israel's sanctification. This is alluded to in the words: החודש הזה לכם, "This month belongs to you." The Jewish Court has been given authority by G–d to declare when the New Moon officially commences, i.e. whether the month just concluded will have twenty-nine or thirty days. The Court similarly enjoys the authority to declare an extra month when this is necessary to ensure that Passover falls in spring, etc. (Rosh Hashanah 22). This is a mystical aspect of the betrothal. It is written here "This month is yours,” and it is written in Genesis 48,9: אשר נתן לי אלוקים בזה, "which the Lord had given me here." On this latter verse Rashi comments that Joseph showed his father the documents testifying to his traditional betrothal and marriage. The sanctity of the Sabbath testifies to the existence of G–d as the Creator. The sanctity of the Sabbath belongs to G–d in His capacity as the Ineffable Name and is eternal. All our sages are agreed that on the festival of Shavuot (which commemorates the giving of the Torah) the element of לכם is essential [just as in the verse announcing that the New Moon is given over to the Jewish people, Ed.], since G–d spoke to us directly on that occasion.

The Midrash may have had in mind that although originally Potiphar was a powerful minister at Pharaoh’s court, he was embarrassed after becoming sexually impotent and decided to join a fraternity of the Priesthood. At that time his name was changed to פוטי פרע (two words). The word און describes the deity which this fraternity of Priests worshipped. We find something analogous in connection with יתרו, Yethro, whom the Torah refers to as כהן מדין “a Priest of Midian.” (Exodus 3,1) There too the word כהן means “clergy,” seeing he too (at that time) was fattening calves in preparation for slaughtering them to pagan deities (Sanhedrin 82). We are told in Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer chapter 38 that Ossnat, Joseph’s wife, was the daughter of Dinah who had been raped by Shechem the son of Chamor. Yaakov had expelled her from his home and had arranged for her to live amongst some bushes. This is why she was called אסנת, from the word סנה, “bush”. When arranging for her to live near that bush Yaakov attached a note around her neck on which was written: “anyone who attaches himself to you thereby will become part of Yaakov’s family.” When Joseph saw this note he went and hid it. This is why when his father asked him who the lads were whom he had brought with him to be blessed, (Genesis 48,9) he said: “they are my sons whom the Lord gave me in this place.” He showed his father the note and what had been written thereon.

but they did not know that I healed them They, in fact, knew, but they trod with their heels; they pretended not to know. The Aggadah in the Midrash of Rabbi Tanhuma (Gen. 48:1) expounds it in reference to the sons of Joseph. When he brought them before Jacob to bless them, Jacob perceived wicked men destined to come from Ephraim, viz. Jeroboam and Ahab, and the Holy Spirit left him, “and he said: Who are these?” Joseph prayed for mercy, and the Holy Spirit rested on Jacob and he blessed them. This is the meaning of: And I trained My spirit upon Jacob for Ephraim’s benefit, and he took them on his arms.

"And take to you" - [This means "bring".] Like (Genesis 48:9), "Take them to me", (Numbers 23:27) "I will take you to another place", (I Samuel 20:31) "Send and take him to me."

Yoseif said to his father, These are my sons, whom Elohim has given me in this [place] [here]. He [Yaakov] said, Please Take [Now bring] them [near] to me, and I will bless them.

And Joseph answered his father, They are my sons which the Word of the Lord gave me according to this writing, according to which I took Asenath the daughter of Dinah thy daughter to be my wife. And he said, Bring them now near to me, and I will bless them.

ועיני ישראל כבדו מזקן, Israel's eyes were heavy with old age, etc. Why did the Torah choose this point to inform us of Jacob's failing eyesight? What does it have to do with his proceeding to embrace and kiss Joseph's children? Besides, why did the Torah have to describe these kisses as להם instead of אותם? Perhaps one of these details will help us understand the other detail. Jacob embraced the children in the wrong places and kissed them in the wrong places due to his failing eyesight. If that were true the expression להם instead of אותם is quite understandable.

ויגש אותם אליו, not in this order.

לא יוכל לראות, he could not see clearly. In order for a blessing to take hold it is necessary for the one bestowing the blessing to see the party whom he blesses at the time the blessing is pronounced. [the same is true of a curse, this is why Balak took Bileam to a vantage point from which he could see the people of Israel whom he had been hired to curse, clearly. (Numbers 23,13). G’d also took Moses to a point from which he could see the land of Israel clearly so that he could bless the land. Something similar occurred in Kings II 2,24 where Elisha turned around to face the lads mocking his baldness before he cursed them.

וישק להם ויחבק להם, the physical contact was designed to make Yaakov more attached to them so that his blessing would be correspondingly more effective.

And the eyes of Israel were heavy with age. At that time there was no way to cure the degeneration of vision in old age. Once one’s vision became cloudy, one could distinguish only between light and darkness. Therefore, he was unable to see anything other than shadows. He, Joseph, had them approach him and he, Jacob, kissed them, and he embraced them.

וישק להם ויחבק להם, “he kissed and embraced them.” Man is not blessed with the presence of the Divine (spirit) unless he is in a state of joy, happiness. This is why being kissed and embraced by his father enabled the blessing to take hold on Joseph and his sons.

“Israel’s eyes were dim with age” [48:10]. Toldot Yizhak writes. Why does the Torah tell us that Jacob could not see? The explanation is that a person who wants to bless or curse, that person looks at the one he wishes to bless or curse. Then the person can do what he needs to do. Therefore, the verse says that Jacob had trouble seeing and that is why he could not bless the children of Joseph with his eyes. That is to say, that he should cast a good eye on them. That is why Jacob said to Joseph. You must bring the children before me so that I may touch them with my hands and embrace them and kiss them. Through this, the blessing will come to them. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 48:8–10.) In these generations, few people have good eyes to bless. Therefore, we must bless with the hands. Jacob said: I did not think that I would see you, and now the Holy One has shown me your children.

Rabbi Elazar, his son, kissed his hands and said, This is well. Abraham shines on the side of his grade, and Isaac is darkened on the side of his grade. But why did Jacob (grow darker), as it is written, "Now the eyes of Yisrael were dim (lit. 'heavy') from age" (Beresheet 48:10). He answers, Assuredly it is, for it is written, "heavy," and not dim; It is written "from age", not 'his age.' "From age" is to be interpreted as the age of Isaac, on the side (of Isaac) his eyes "were heavy so that he could not see" (Ibid.), not properly, but he was not absolutely blind. But Yitzchak's eyes were completely dim, and it became darkness, for night clove to him and it was fulfilled, "and the darkness he called Night."

Chapter 40: Torah [1] And it came to pass, that when Isaac was old (Genesis 27:1). Twenty generations passed until Abraham, in which old age is not mentioned except for him, as it says, "Now Abraham was old" (Genesis 24:1). And Isaac also stood [before God] and it came to pass, that when Isaac was old (Genesis 27:1). And Jacob also stood [before God], as it says, "And the eyes of Israel were dim with age" (Genesis 48:10). The verse (Psalms 102:17) says, "He will regard the prayer of the destitute, and not despise their prayer." The only way [to achieve this level of prayer] is through old age, as it says, "The beauty of young men is their strength, and the glory of old men is their gray hair" (Proverbs 20:29). Abraham merited his son through five things, as our Rabbis taught: the father merits a son through five things: through his [the father's] name, through his [the father's] good deeds, through his [the father's] wealth, through his [the father's] strength, and through his [the father's] wisdom. Similarly, Isaac [merited his son through five things], and similarly Jacob [merited his son through five things]. Similarly, Jacob merited Joseph [through these five things], who resembled him in appearance and in title, as it says, "And Joseph was handsome in form and appearance" (Genesis 39:6). [He resembled him] in wisdom, as it says, "Behold, he is the master of dreams" (Genesis 37:19). He had beauty, appearance, and wisdom. And in Isaac's case, it is written, "Who is this man?" (Genesis 24:65). What is the meaning of "this man" in reference to Joseph? That he was handsome and had wisdom. Likewise, Isaac was also built with wisdom. And just as Joseph stood up to his brothers in strength, so did Isaac stand up in strength against all the men of Gerar. Just as Joseph was wealthy, so was Isaac wealthy, as it says, "And the man became great and went forward and became very great" (Genesis 26:13). The verse (Genesis 26:8) explains [the word] "wisdom" as meaning "the greatness of his children." From where do we learn that Isaac was handsome like Joseph? It is written about Joseph, "And Joseph was handsome in form and appearance," and when he went to his brothers, what did they say? "Behold, the master of dreams is coming!" (Genesis 37:19). And it is said about Isaac, "Who is this man?" (Genesis 24:65). What is the meaning of "this man" in reference to Joseph? That he was handsome and had wisdom. Likewise, Isaac was also built with strength, as it says, We know this from the fact that he dug many wells, as it says, "Isaac dug again the wells of water" (Genesis 26:18), and "Isaac's servants dug in the valley" (Genesis 26:19), and "they dug another well" (Genesis 26:21). He had strength in his hands. From where do we know that he was wealthy? It says, "The man became great, and he grew richer and richer until he was very wealthy" (Genesis 26:13). And from where do we know that he lived to a ripe old age of 180 years? It says, "And Isaac lived one hundred and eighty years" (Genesis 35:28). Abraham was the son of Terah, and Isaac was the son of Abraham. Why does the Torah mention this? Because God said to Isaac, "You have merited these five things, so I will add another five years to your life, like your father Abraham." That is why it says, "Look upon your servants" (Psalms 119:16). Anyone who has merit will receive these five things, and anyone who does not have merit will receive five calamities in return. And who was this? Joab, as it is said: "Let Joab and his descendants be perpetually guilty of their bloodshed. May they be afflicted with leprosy, jaundice, and starvation." (2 Samuel 3:29) Leprosy corresponds to strength; one who has leprosy has no strength. Jaundice corresponds to beauty; even if someone is young and jaundiced, there is no beauty in them. Starvation corresponds to wealth, as it says, "Come, eat my food and drink the wine I have mixed. Leave your simple ways and you will live" (Proverbs 9:5-6). One who is starving has no leisure to engage in Torah study. Falling by the sword corresponds to the five aspects of praise. These are five calamities corresponding to five aspects of praise. One who does not merit praise inherits these five kinds of calamities, like Joab. But one who does merit praise receives them like Isaac, as it is said, "And it came to pass, when Isaac was old" (Genesis 27:1), and David cries out, "May your children be like your ancestors" (Psalms 45:17). Therefore, it says, "And it came to pass, when Isaac was old."

Thus has R. Tanhuma interpreted (Gen. 27:1): NOW IT CAME TO PASS, THAT WHEN ISAAC WAS OLD < AND HIS EYES WERE TOO WEAK TO SEE >. You find that there are twenty generations from Adam to Abraham, and there is no < mention of > old age written about < any of > them except Abraham, as stated (in Gen. 24:1): NOW ABRAHAM WAS OLD. (For parallel accounts, see above, 5:4.) Isaac arose, < and > it is also written (in Gen. 27:1): NOW IT CAME TO PASS, THAT WHEN ISAAC WAS OLD. Jacob arose, < and > it is also written (in Gen. 48:10): NOW ISRAEL'S EYES WERE DIM WITH AGE. This text is related (to Ps. 90:16): LET YOUR WORK BE WORTHY FOR YOUR SERVANTS AND YOUR GLORY ON BEHALF OF THEIR CHILDREN. Now GLORY can only be old age and gray hair, as stated (in Prov. 20:29): THE BEAUTY OF THE YOUNG IS THEIR STRENGTH; BUT THE GLORY OF THE OLD IS GRAY HAIR. Ergo (in Ps. 90:16): AND YOUR GLORY ON BEHALF OF THEIR CHILDREN. < These words mean > that Abraham endowed Isaac with five things. Thus have our masters taught (in 'Eduy. 2:9): A FATHER ENDOWS HIS SON WITH FIVE THINGS: WITH BEAUTY, WITH STRENGTH, WITH WEALTH, WITH WISDOM, AND WITH < LENGTH OF > YEARS. How is it shown about BEAUTY? In that Isaac was as handsome as Joseph. It is written of Joseph (in Gen. 39:6): NOW JOSEPH WAS WELL BUILT. Also, when he went to his brothers, they said (in Gen. 37:19): HERE COMES THIS (hallazeh) DREAMER. It is also said of Isaac (in Gen. 24:65): WHO IS THIS (hallazeh) MAN < WALKING IN THE FIELD TO MEET US >? Thus Isaac was as handsome as Joseph. How is it shown that Isaac was mighty in STRENGTH? Look at how many wells he dug! Thus it is stated (in Gen. 26:18-22): THEN ISAAC REDUG < THE WELLS OF WATER >…. AND ISAAC'S SERVANTS DUG…. AND THEY DUG ANOTHER WELL…. THEN HE MOVED FROM THERE AND DUG < ANOTHER WELL >…. Look at the power which he had! Where is it shown about WEALTH? Where it is stated (in Gen. 26:13): AND THE MAN GREW < RICHER AND RICHER >…. It also says (in vs. 14): AND HE POSSESSED FLOCKS < AND HERDS >…. Where is it shown about WISDOM? Where he said to his father (in Gen. 22:7 at the time of his being bound): HERE ARE THE FIRE AND THE WOOD…. [How is it shown] about < LENGTH OF > YEARS? In that he was one hundred and eighty years old < when he died >, while Abraham was < only > one hundred and seventy-five. On account of these five things {through which he had attained merit}, five years more than his father's were added to him. It is therefore stated (in Ps. 90:16): LET YOUR WORK BE WORTHY FOR YOUR SERVANTS…. Anyone who has merit is meritorious in these five things, and anyone who does not have merit is not meritorious and receives five retributions that correspond to them. (See yQid. 1:7 (61a).) And who is this anyone? This is Joab, of whom it is stated (in II Sam. 3:29): MAY IT (Abner's blood) FALL UPON THE HEAD OF JOB AND HIS SON; (Masoretic Text: ALL HIS FATHER’S HOUSE.) [MAY THE HOUSE OF JOAB NEVER LACK ONE WITH A DISCHARGE, A LEPER, A MALE WHO HANDLES THE SPINDLE, ONE WHO FALLS BY THE SWORD, AND ONE LACKING BREAD]. ONE WITH A DISCHARGE corresponds to STRENGTH. In the case of one who has a discharge, there is no one weaker than he. A LEPER corresponds to BEAUTY. In the case of one who is a leper, even a young < leper >, there is no one more ugly than he. A MALE WHO HANDLES THE SPINDLE corresponds to WEALTH; for he [is one] {like a poor woman is one} who, if not spinning flax, has nothing of which to eat. ONE LACKING BREAD corresponds to WISDOM, as stated (in Prov. 9:5, where Wisdom says): COME AND EAT OF MY BREAD. And ONE WHO FALLS BY THE SWORD corresponds to < LENGTH OF > YEARS. The one who sins is afflicted by them, but the one who is meritorious receives, as did Isaac. David also gave praise (in Ps. 45:17 [16]): INSTEAD OF YOUR PARENTS THERE WILL BE YOUR CHILDREN.

And God almighty give you mercy before the man (Gen. 43:14). Scripture states elsewhere in allusion to this verse: For this let everyone that is godly pray unto Thee in a time when Thou mayest be found (Ps. 32:6). R. Abba maintained: In a time when Thou mayest be found refers to old age. It is essential that a man pray for an old age in which his eyes may see, his mouth may eat, and his feet may walk. Normally, when a man becomes old, his faculties leave him. For example, it is written about Isaac: And it came to pass, that when Isaac was old, and his eyes were dim, so that he could not see (Gen. 27:1). And concerning Jacob, Scripture states: Now the eyes of Israel were dim for age, so that he could not see (Gen. 48:10). As to a mouth that could not eat, we find that Barzillai said to David: Can thy servant taste what I eat or what I drink? Can I hear anymore the voice of singing men and singing women? Therefore, then, should thy servant be a burden unto my lord the king? (II Sam. 19:35).

... [What about all] the praise of Joseph, who exceeded in the honor of his father? And yet he did not enter into him all the time, such that were it not that they came to tell him, "Your father is sick," he would not have known! Rather this is to inform you of his righteousness. For he did not want to be alone with his father, lest he say to him, "How did your brothers act with you?" And [then] he would curse them.... Hence he did not go to his father all the time.)

ותכהין עיניו מראות, ”his eyes weakened due to seeing.” According to the plain meaning of the text, a decline in the quality of vision is a normal phenomenon in people who reach a certain age, We find such a phenomenon as occurring to the prophet Achiyah Hashiloni (Kings I 14,4). When the Torah testified that Moses at 120 had not lost any part of his vision or any other bodily functions, (Deut. 34,7) this is reported precisely because it was a miracle.

SO ESAU DESPISED HIS BIRTHRIGHT. Who so despiseth the word shall suffer thereby. (Proverbs 13:13. Ramban’s intent in quoting this verse is to explain why it was necessary for the verse before us to say, So Esau ‘despised,’ since, as is clearly indicated in Scripture later on, Esau regretted his action and complained that he [Jacob] took my birthright. (Further, 28:36.) Scripture therefore justifies what befell Esau later on by saying here, So Esau ‘despised’ the birthright, and he who despises the word shall suffer thereby.) But, indeed, Scripture has already explained the reason that Esau consented to the sale. This was because he was in mortal danger from his hunting animals, and it was likely that he would die while his father was alive, and the birthright carried with it no distinction except after the passing of the father. So of what benefit was the birthright to him? This then is what Scripture says: And he did eat and drink, and he rose and went, and he despised, for, after having eaten and drunk, he returned to his hunt in the field which was the cause of the despising of the birthright. For there is no desire in fools (Ecclesiastes 5:3.) except to eat and drink and to fulfill their momentary desire, not giving a care for tomorrow. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra has erred here exceedingly by saying that Esau despised the birthright because he saw his father destitute of wealth. Now, [continues Ibn Ezra,] many wonder about Isaac’s poverty since Abraham left him with great wealth. But have they never seen a person who was wealthy in his younger years and became poor in his old age? An indication that Isaac was indeed poor is the fact that Isaac loved Esau because of his venison. Furthermore, had there been abundant food in his father’s house and he [Esau] “the honorable one in his sight,” (See Isaiah 43:4.) he would not have sold his birthright for pottage. Also, if his father ate savory meat every day, what reason was there for him to say to Esau, “Bring me some venison?” (See further, 27:3-4.) Why did Jacob not have costly garments as Esau had? (See ibid., Verse 15.) Why did his mother not give Jacob some silver and gold for his journey when he fled to Haran so that he had to say, And He will give me bread to eat, and a garment to put on? (Ibid., 28:20.) Why did she not send him some money — since she loved him — so that he was required to tend Laban’s flock? (All these questions indicate that Isaac was indeed poor.) The verse which states, Thus the man grew (Further, 26:13.) [in wealth], must refer to the period before he became old. Now ignorant people think that wealth is a great distinction for the righteous. Let Elijah prove the contrary. (See I Kings 17:6, where Elijah’s poverty is depicted.) These ignorant people further ask, “Why did G-d cause Isaac to lack wealth?” Perhaps they could also inform us why He caused Isaac’s vision to be diminished? And let them not dismiss me with a reply based upon a d’rash (The D’rash (Aggadic) answer is that Isaac’s eyes became dim as a result of Esau’s wives offering incense to the idols. See Rashi further, 27:1, where this is one of several reasons mentioned.) for there is indeed a secret (Interpreters of Ibn Ezra suggest that “the secret” referred to here is the fact that Isaac was a son of Abraham’s old age, and it was for this reason that his eyesight was weak.) in the matter, and we must not probe since the thoughts of G-d are deep and no man has the power to understand them. All these are Abraham ibn Ezra’s words. Now I wonder who has blinded Abraham ibn Ezra’s reasoning in this matter, causing him to say that Abraham left Isaac great wealth, and he lost it just prior to this event, [that is, the sale of the birthright], and for this reason, Esau despised the birthright, for this matter of the sale of the birthright took place when Jacob and Esau were still young, before Esau married, as Scripture tells, (And Esau was forty years old when he took to wife. (26:34).) and after the sale of the birthright, Isaac again became wealthy in the land of the Philistines until he became very great… and the Philistines were jealous of him. (Further, 26:13-14.) Following that, [according to Ibn Ezra, we must say that Isaac] again became poor, and he desired the venison of his son Esau and the savory meats. All this is laughable. Furthermore, the verse says, And it came to pass after the death of Abraham, that G-d blessed his son Isaac. (Above, 25:11.) Now the blessing refers to increase of wealth, possessions and honor, but where was His blessing if he lost the wealth of his father and became impoverished? Afterwards it says, And I will be with Thee, and I will bless thee, (Further, 26:3.) [but according to Ibn Ezra you will have to say that Isaac] became rich and then poor! And if it be true that in matters of wealth, There are righteous men unto whom it happeneth according to the work of the wicked, (Ecclesiastes 8:14.) this does not apply to those righteous men who have been expressly blessed by the Holy One, blessed be He, since the blessing of the Eternal maketh rich, and no sorrow is added thereto. (Proverbs 10:22.) Rather, the patriarchs all were as kings before whom kings of the nations came and with whom they made covenants. Now it is written concerning Isaac and Abimelech, And they swore one to another. (Further, 26:31.) But if Isaac had suffered bad fortune and lost his father’s wealth, how did [Abimelech, King of the Philistines, and Phichol, the head of his army], say, we saw plainly that the Eternal was with thee, (Ibid., Verse 28.) when he was already in financial difficulty? Rather, Esau’s disdain of the birthright was due to his brutal nature. It is possible that the law of double portion to which the firstborn is entitled according to the statutes of the Torah (Deuteronomy 21:17.) was not in effect in ancient times. (That is, in the time of the patriarchs.) [At that time the birthright] was only a matter of inheriting the pre-eminence of the father and his authority so that he [the firstborn] would receive honor and distinction in relation to his younger brother. It is for this reason that Esau said to Isaac, I am thy son, thy firstborn, (Further, 27:32.) meaning to say that he is the firstborn who deserves to be blessed. Similarly, [Joseph said to his father, Jacob], For this is the firstborn; put thy hand upon his head, (Ibid., 48:18.) thereby meaning that Jacob should give him precedence in the blessing. Perhaps the firstborn also took slightly more of the inheritance since the law of double portion is an innovation of the statutes of the Torah. (Thus even in ancient times it was customary that the firstborn inherit more than one share. However, the Torah established his portion to be two shares. This interpretation differs from Ramban’s original thesis that the firstborn originally had no preference whatever in inheritance, and that the Torah instituted this law.) And as for the venison in his mouth which Isaac desired so strongly, this is in keeping with the custom of princes and kings. They prefer venison above all food, and out of fear, all nations bring them gifts of venison. Esau flattered his father by bringing him all the venison so that he may always eat of it to his heart’s content, (Ramban thus explains Isaac’s desire for venison without postulating Isaac’s poverty as Ibn Ezra did.) and the love of a father for his firstborn is easily understood. As for Isaac’s saying that he would bless Esau after he had prepared the savory meats for him, that was not a reward or a recompense for the food. Instead, he wanted to derive some benefit from him so that his very soul would be bound up in his at the time that he brought him the food so that he would then bless him with a complete desire and a perfect will. Perhaps Isaac discerned in himself that following the meal his soul would be delighted and joyous, and then the Ruach Hakodesh (“The holy spirit.” The expression refers to a degree of prophecy. See Moreh Nebuchim, II, 45 (2).) would come upon him, [as was the case with Elisha the prophet, who said], ‘But now bring me a minstrel. And it came to pass, when the minstrel played, that the hand of the Eternal came upon him. (II Kings 3:15.) And as for not giving wealth to Jacob, that was [not due to Isaac’s poverty but rather] because Jacob was fleeing for his life. He left the country alone without his brother’s knowledge, and had he been given along wealth, servants and camels, they would have increased his enemies’ jealousy and resulted in their ambushing him and killing him. Our Rabbis do indeed say that Jacob was robbed [at the outset of his journey (Bereshith Rabbah 68:2. Thus another difficulty tending to favor Ibn Ezra’s thesis that Isaac was poverty stricken is resolved.) of whatever possessions he had]. And who has told Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra that Jacob had no costly garments, fine linen and silk and embroidered robes? (Ezekiel 16:13.) Rather, Scripture states that when going to the field to hunt, Esau would change his garments for his hunting clothes, and due to the fact that [because of his dim eyesight], Isaac always touched his son and his clothes with his hands, Rebekah clothed Jacob with them lest he recognize him by his clothes. You see that this is precisely what Isaac did: And he smelled the odor of his garments (Further, 27:27.) because he had put them among calamus and cinnamon, even as it is written, Myrrh and aloes, and cassia are all thy garments. (Psalms 45:9.) The spices grew in the Land of Israel, and it is for this reason that Isaac said, The odor of my son is as the odor of a field. (Further, 27:27.) Because he was a man of the field (See above, Verse 27.) his garments had the odor of the field or that of the blossoms of the trees, just as our Rabbis explained it: As the odor of a field (Further, 27:27.) of apples. (Taanith 29b.) And as for the question raised above concerning the quality of Isaac’s lack of vision, it is a question raised by the ignorant, for if (Further in the text Ramban suggests that Isaac’s dim vision was a natural result of his old age. Hence he writes here: “If it was brought about.”) it was brought about especially by G-d, it was in order that Isaac bless Jacob, this being the purport of the verse, And it came to pass, that when Isaac was old, and his eyes were dim, he called Esau. (Further, 27:1.) And in line with the natural meaning of Scripture, this was but a manifestation of old age, the explanation of the verse being as follows: And it came to pass, that when Isaac was old, and his eyes were dim in his old age, he called Esau. Now of Jacob himself it is said later on, Now the eyes of Israel were dim for age, so that he could not see. (Ibid., 48:10.) Of Achiyah the Shilonite it is also written, Now Achiyah could not see; for his eyes were set by reason of his age, (I Kings 14:4.) and concerning Moses our teacher it is related with wonder that his eye was not dim. (Deuteronomy 34:7.)

As he blessed his grandsons, Jacob deliberately “[made] his hands wise” (Rashi, Genesis 48:14.) and graced Ephraim with the bull’s share of the blessing. (Genesis 49:22.) He must have seen the potential greatness of the lad, purposefully dimming his eyes to the convention of the firstborn receiving the more significant inheritance. (Genesis 48:10.)

BARAITHA. Subordinate your will to the will of Heaven; for so we find that Jacob did not kiss Joseph. GEMARA. Why did he not kiss him? He thought that, since he was away from home, women may have led him astray because of his beauty; as it is written, And he presented himself unto him, and fell on his neck. (Gen. 46, 29, which does not mention Jacob kissing his son.) [Joseph] wanted to kiss him but he would not let him do so, as it is written, And he wept on his neck a good while. (ibid., a good while is explained that Joseph kept on weeping but Jacob still did not kiss him.) That is to say, he [only] kissed him when he died, as it is written, And wept upon him, and kissed him. (ibid. L, 1.) Joseph said, ‘Thirty-nine years have [passed] before him (i.e. it was thirty-nine years since Joseph left home. As Jacob lived in Egypt seventeen years (ibid. XLVII, 28), Joseph must have been separated from his father twenty-two years.) and I have not kissed my father’s mouth, and now shall I bury him without kissing him?’ That is the meaning of what is written, And Israel beheld Joseph’s sons and said: Who are these? (ibid. XLVIII, 8.) Did he not know until then who they were? But [Jacob] inquired of him whether they had been born in wedlock, (lit. ‘with a kethubah’, i.e. according to the Hebrew marriage law.) and when he showed him the kethubah his mind became at rest and he kissed them for the sake of Joseph. Raba said: Infer from this that [Joseph] was aroused sexually by her; (viz. Potiphar’s wife (ibid. XXXIX, 7ff), otherwise Jacob would not have doubted Joseph’s moral purity.) for should you say that he was not aroused by her, it has been taught: (B.M. 83b (Sonc. ed., pp. 478f.). The reference is to the story of R. Eleazar b. Simeon, who had a man arrested because of his insolence towards him and subsequently hanged. R. Eleazar regretted his action, but was assured by his disciples that the man must have been guilty of a capital crime. On hearing this, he felt relieved and reassured that his own body would not decompose after his death.) He laid his hand upon his heart (lit. ‘his inwards’, and similarly in the continuation.) and exclaimed, ‘Rejoice my heart, rejoice my heart! If matters about which you are doubtful are so, (i.e. seem to be just. He was doubtful whether the man deserved hanging.) how much more those about which you are certain! I am confident that neither worms nor decay will have power over you’. He applied to himself the verse, My flesh also dwelleth in safety. (Ps. 16, 9.) Now he (viz. R. Eleazar; and yet he felt assured that the worms would have no power over his body.) is not mentioned among those [over whom the worms have no dominion], (Cf. B.B. 17a (Sonc. ed., p. 86): ‘There are seven over whom the worms had no dominion, viz. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Moses, Aaron and Miriam, and Benjamin, son of Jacob’.) how much more so Jacob who is mentioned! (How could Jacob then doubt the innocence of Joseph, seeing that the sin of suspecting the innocent would have lost him that privilege?) Therefore [we must say] that Jacob held back from kissing Joseph because of what he saw by means of the Holy Spirit. (He was inspired by God to do so in order that Joseph should not communicate her moral impurity to him.) And where is this (Joseph’s moral impurity.) alluded to? As it is written, But his (i.e. Joseph’s.) bow abode firm; (Gen. 49, 24. The word bow is found in both the passages cited. On the exegetical rule of Gezerah Shawah, inference from analogous phraseology, what applies to one applies also to the other. In Hab. the bow is described as being bare, ‘eryah, which is equated with ‘erwah, ‘forbidden intercourse’. Consequently the use of bow in connection with Joseph indicates that there was an occasion when he was aroused sinfully.) and it is written there, Thy bow is made quite bare. (Hab. 3, 9. The Heb. maṭṭeh can mean ‘rod’ or ‘tribe’. The Rabbinic interpretation is that God swore to Jacob that the tribes descended from him would be pure.) What caused him to be saved? Sworn are the rods of the word. Selah. What is the meaning of Selah? (The word. Selah is by a process of analogy equated with the words the God of Jacob … Selah; that is to say, the word sworn by the God of Jacob to him.) It is to be taken in the sense of The God of Jacob … Selah. (Ps. 46, 12.) It was quoted in refutation, And it came to pass, when Laban heard the tidings of Jacob his sister’s son, that he ran to meet him, and embraced him, and kissed him (Gen. 29, 13.) —is not this a case where an inference from minor to major is to be drawn? If of Laban who kissed idols and harlots it is so written, (That he kissed Jacob.) Joseph who did not kiss these [yet did not kiss Jacob]! Perhaps the verse should not have written this, but it points to Jacob’s merit. [It indicates,] And he [Laban] ran to meet him, i.e. he wanted to kiss him but [Jacob] would not permit him; he then embraced him again to kiss him, whereupon he struck [Laban] on his cheek. This may be proved from the fact that it is written wayyenashsheḳ (There are two Heb. roots with the same letters, one meaning ‘to kiss’ and the other ‘to be equipped with weapons’, and the verb in the verse is given the second sense, i.e. he attacked him.) and not wayyishshaḳ. Hence it is proved; here it is written, And he kissed them (Gen. 48, 10, where the verb is wayyishshaḳ and denotes an expression of love.) and [continues], And embraced them. What is the difference between wayyishshaḳ and wayyenashsheḳ? The latter (Which is an intensive form of the verb.) indicates [kissing] with the whole body, the former [only] with the mouth. Whence do we know that this is so? For it is written, He kisses [yishshaḳ] the lips that giveth a right answer. (Prov. 24, 26.) Wherever wayyishshaḳ occurs it denotes a [light] impress to be added to the count. (A single gesture which may form part of a further display of affection subsequently.) Come and hear: [It is stated,] And Esau ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his neck and kissed him. (Gen. 33, 4, the verb being wayyishshaḳ.) Is not this [act of kissing] similar to what Laban did? The reply is: Go and see how many teeth were dug into him. (In the Heb. text the word has dots over the letters, which are taken by the Midrash to indicate that Esau’s real intention was to bite Jacob. [Cf. ARN, p. 165.]) And why? Because he [really] wanted to bite him, but at the time his teeth became as [soft as] wax and he knocked his jaws against Jacob’s neck and became weak. To that episode David alluded when he said, Arise, O Lord; save me, O my God; for Thou hast smitten all mine enemies upon the cheek, Thou hast broken the teeth of the wicked. (Ps. 3, 8.)

When they were in Egypt there was a yeshiva with them, as it is stated: “Go and gather the Elders of Israel” (Exodus 3:16), indicating that there were Sages among them who studied Torah. And similarly, when they were in the desert, there was a yeshiva with them, as it is stated: “Gather for me seventy men from the Elders of Israel” (Numbers 11:16). Abraham our Patriarch was himself an Elder and would sit in yeshiva, as it is stated: “And Abraham was old, advanced in years” (Genesis 24:1). From the apparent redundancy of the terms old and advanced in years, it is derived that old means that he was a wise Elder and prominent in Torah, and advanced in years means that he was elderly. Similarly, Isaac our Patriarch was an Elder and sat in yeshiva, as it is stated: “And it came to pass when Isaac was old and his eyes were dim” (Genesis 27:1). Similarly, Jacob our Patriarch was an Elder and sat in yeshiva, as it is stated: “And Israel’s eyes were heavy with age” (Genesis 48:10).

Yisrael’s eyes were heavy with age, and he could not see. He [Yoseif] brought them near to him, and he kissed them and hugged them.

But Israel's eyes were heavy from age, and he could not see. And he brought them to him, and he kissed them and embraced them.

לא פללתי, an expression describing prayer as a request from G-d. We find this word in this sense also in Psalms 106,30, where it quotes Pinchas as having prayed. Yaakov says that he had not even prayed to see Joseph again, as it would have been inappropriate seeing that he thought he had seen evidence that Joseph had been the victim of a wild beast. (Genesis 37,33) An alternate explanation: whenever this word occurs it refers to making a judgment, i.e. arriving at a definitive conclusion. Yaakov would have been saying that he had never even entertained real hope to see Joseph again. (Rash’bam)

Yoseif brought them out. He moved his children aside so that he could bow to his father directly. He prostrated himself. To thank him for making his sons into distinct tribes.

[I HAD NOT THOUGHT.] Pillalti (I thought) means, my mind never judged that I would ever see you. It comes from the same root as pelilim (judges) (Deut. 32:31). (Its root is peh, lamed, lamed.)

לא פללתי, related to the word ונתן בפלילים (Exodus 21,22) meaning here “I have not judged the situation and responsibility by myself but have left it to independent judges who are without prejudice.” As far as Joseph’s fate was concerned, Yaakov said that he had not arrived at definitive conclusions but had not dared hope that he would ever see him again. Some commentators relate the word פללתי to the word תפלה, prayer, in which case Yaakov was saying to Joseph that he had not prayed to G’d concerning being reunited with Joseph in this life as he had considered it a forbidden, vain prayer, i.e. uttering the Lord’s name in vain, seeing that all the evidence he had at his disposal indicated that Joseph was already dead. (compare Midrash Lekach Tov on this paragraph)

ראה, as if the Torah had written ראות. We find a similar construction in Genesis 50,20 where the words עשה כיום הזה mean the same as if the Torah had written עשות כיום הזה.

לא פיללתי, I never “judged,” in my heart. The word פילול whenever it occurs describes judgment. One example is Psalms 106,30) describing Pinchas’ state of mind before he slew Zimri as ויפלל , describing the manner in which avenged G’d’s honour which had been defiled by Zimri. (Numbers 25,7) Judgment, דין, and נקמה, retribution, avenging, are two words describing opposite sides of the same coin.

לא פללתי I HAD NOT CONTEMPLATED — I had never dared to cherish the thought that I would again see your face. פללתי is an expression for thinking, like the noun in (Isaiah 16:3) “Give counsel, carry out the thought (פלילה)”.

פלל ,פללתי verwandt mit בלל, etwas von außen in einen Stoff bringen und diesen damit ganz zu einer einheitlichen Masse durchdringen lassen, (unterschieden von ערב: mengen, mischen). Was בלל konkret ist, das bedeutet פלל geistig: ein geistiges Element, einen Gedanken, eine Wahrheit, ein Prinzip etc. in einen Kreis von Gedanken oder Verhältnissen bringen, und diese durch dies hineingetragene Element durchdringend verbinden und einen. Daher פלל das Geschäft des Richters, der das Prinzip des Rechts und des Gesetzes in alle Verhältnisse durchgreifend bringt und dadurch die Vielheit zu einer Einheit gestaltet. Daher dieser ja auch אלהים genannt, von אלה: diese, ein Begriff, der immer die Subsumierung einer Vielheit unter eine Einheit voraussetzt. התפלל: sich mit göttlichen Gedanken durchdringen. Jüdisches Beten ist nicht von innen heraus, sondern von außen herein. Gebe es nur ein Beten von innen heraus, d. h. ein Hinauslegen bereits im Innern vorhandener Gedanken, so wären "vorgeschriebene" Gebete, noch dazu zu einer bestimmten Zeit, von einer unbegrenzten Mehrheit zu betende Gebete purer Wahnsinn. Denn sie setzen voraus, daß auf Kommando in einem bestimmten Augenblick bei einer beliebigen Vielheit von Menschen gewisse Gedanken und Empfindungen vorhanden und des Ausdruckes bedürftig seien. So nicht. התפלל heißt: ewig geltend bleibende Wahrheiten immer wieder aufs neue mit ihnen durchdringen, eben weil sie sonst sich abschwächen, entschwinden, ja schon entschwunden sein können. Hier: ראה פניך לא פללתי: der Gedanke, dich noch einmal wiederzusehen, lag mir so fern von jeder Möglichkeit der Realisierung, daß ich ihm in mein Inneres keinen Eingang verschaffen konnte.

גם את זרעך, the ones to whom the description קהל עמים applied. (verse 4) Yaakov continued (perhaps not audibly); this is when He said to me that He blessed me, i.e. Yaakov had repeated this blessing by G’d in his conversation to Joseph without being that specific. [I had to paraphrase this to make the author intelligible. Ed.] As a result of that blessing which I received, my blessing to you now will be effective, so that by blessing his sons he also blessed Joseph at the same time.

I did not dare have any thought... Rashi is answering the question: Yaakov thought that “Yoseif has been torn to pieces” (37:33). If so, why would he think he would see him? Thus Rashi explains, “I did not dare have any thought.” In other words, it never occurred to me to think differently, that perhaps you were not torn up and I will see you alive.

Israel said to Joseph: I did not expect to see your face after so many years, as I did not believe it was possible, and behold, not only has this occurred, but God has shown me your offspring as well. Before bestowing his blessing, Jacob strengthens himself through this expression of amazement and praise.

לא פללתי, “I had not dared to expect.” I had not even entertained such a thought in my heart. The word is derived from פלילים, criminal judgments.

Four passages [of the Torah]: (contain references to the mitzvah of tefillin.) Kadesh Li and V'hayah ki y'viacha Ado-nai in the book of Exodus 13:1-10 and (The commentaries suggest that, in this instance, the Rambam cited the source for these passages because there is also a passage in the book of Deuteronomy that begins V'hayah Ki Y'viacha.) 13:11-16) and Shema and V'hayah im shamo'a (Deuteronomy 6:4-9) and (Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 422) explains that these four passages were chosen because they include the concepts of the oneness of God, the acceptance of His yoke and the yoke of His commandments, and the description of the exodus from Egypt. These are fundamental principles of the Jewish faith.) 11:13-21) should be written separately (on parchment) and covered with leather. (as described in Chapter 3.) They are called tefillin. (Tosafot, Menachot 34b states the word is related to the root ללפ, which means "dispute." The Tur (Orach Chayim 25) inteprets the word as meaning "sign." Tefillot Yisrael associates the term with the power of thought, citing Genesis 48:11. The Pri Megadim (Orach Chayim 25:20) understands the term as meaning, "mark of distinction.") They are placed on the head and tied (The commentaries note the difference between the two verbs, "placed" and "tied." See also our commentary on Chapter 4, Halachah 4. It is, nevertheless, worth noting that in the listing of the mitzvot in the introduction to the Mishneh Torah, the Rambam mentions "tying the tefillin on the head.") on the arm. (Sefer HaMitzvot (Positive Commandments 12 and 13) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvot 421 and 422) consider these obligations to be two of the Torah's 613 mitzvot. (See Menachot 44a.) Since they are two separate mitzvot, the performance of one is not dependent on the performance of the other, as stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 4.) According to Torah law, even a mere point of one of the letters (for example, the yud has a short foot in its lower right-hand corner. If that foot is missing, it is considered to have been improperly formed. Therefore, not only it, but the entire passage is not acceptable.) from these four passages prevents all of them from being acceptable. All four must be written in the proper manner. (If even one of the passages is not written in the proper manner, the person is not considered to have fulfilled the mitzvah at all. (See also the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Menachot 3:7.) Accordingly, it is proper to have one's tefillin checked from time to time to make sure that none of the letters have faded. (See the commentary on Chapter 2, Halachah 11.))

Chapter (62) 63: Writings [1] A song of ascents. "Many [peoples] have afflicted me from my youth,"(Psalms 129:1) As it is written in scriptures: "The myrrh bush of my beloved," to me (Song of Songs 1:13). The Assembly of Israel says: Although the inclination and the evil urge troubled me, as it is said, "And they embittered their lives" (Exodus 1:14), the Almighty's son will stay between the two sons of Amram, between Moses and Aaron, as it is said, "Your two breasts" (Song of Songs 7:4). And so it is with the sea, "They were rebelled upon the sea, the Sea of Reeds" (Psalms 106:7). "But he dwells among the desolate cliffs. Your right hand, O Lord, is glorious in power; Your right hand, O Lord, shatters the enemy." (Exodus 15:6).In the desert, both the adversary and the yetzer hara (evil inclination) troubled me, as it is written "And the Lord afflicted the people" (Exodus 32:35), but nevertheless, the Almighty's son will stay between the two, between the first count and the last. Additionally, Jacob, the son of Isaac and grandson of Abraham, says "Great troubles have encompassed me since my youth, but even so, they were not able to overcome me, whether from the hand of God or the evil inclination. As it is said, 'See, I have not caused you to suffer before me' (Genesis 48:11)." Therefore, Jacob began to say, "Great troubles have encompassed me since my youth, but even so, they were not able to overcome me."

And on all hills, etc. And all the hills, where vineyards have formerly been carefully dressed, will now again be prepared; for there will be no thorns, and God will give such a blessing on the vineyards of the mountains, that people will send the cattle there; comp. He bindeth his foal to the vine (Gen. 49:4). The prophet says that from one cow and two sheep there will be obtained a plentiful supply of milk; and the vineyards of the mountains, that will alone remain undamaged, will enjoy a boundless blessing from the Almighty.

[Heb. וְנִפְלַל,] like (Gen. 48:11): “I did not think (פִלָּלְתִּי),” and like (Deut. 32:31): “and our enemies judge (פְּלִילִים).” They will judge themselves to be slain in her midst.

For their rock is not like our Rock, In our enemies’ own estimation. (In our enemies’ own estimation I.e., as everyone must admit. For Heb. pelilim (“own estimation”) see Exod. 21.22; cf. Gen. 48.11.)

When I smiled at them, they would not believe it; They never expected (Taking yappilun as from pll; cf. Gen. 48.11.) a sign of my favor.

Yisrael said to Yoseif, I have never thought to see your face, and behold Elohim has even allowed me to see your offspring.

And Israel said to Joseph, To see thy face I had not reckoned, but, behold, the Lord hath also showed me thy sons.

ויוצא יוסף אותם מעם ברכיו, “and Joseph brought them out from between his knees.” He did so as they had cleaved to their grandfather physically and had kissed him and embraced him. Joseph now wished them to assume a dignified posture to enable Yaakov to place his hands on their heads. Each one should receive his blessing while Yaakov had one hand on the head of each one of them.

AND JOSEPH BROUGHT THEM OUT FROM BETWEEN HIS KNEES. This verse should have followed And he blessed them that day, etc. (v. 20). (So Krinsky, Weiser and Cherez. The point being that Manesseh and Ephraim were between Joseph’s knees until the conclusion of the blessing. Hence our verse should have followed verse 20. However, the problem remains, why is this verse misplaced? Filwarg interprets I.E. as saying that Scripture first summarizes what transpired during the blessing and then goes into detail, that is, Scripture in verses 9-12 tells us that Joseph brought his children to Jacob and that Jacob placed them between his knees, kissed them and blessed them and that Joseph took them from between his knees, and bowed in gratitude before his father for blessing his children. Then in verses 13-20 the Bible tells us exactly what transpired during the blessing.)

[FROM BETWEEN HIS KNEES.] Jacob sat on the edge of the bed. (Jacob sat on the edge of the bed with his feet on the ground and Manasseh and Ephraim were between his knees (Cherez).)

ויוצא, after he had kissed and embraced them before he had blessed them, Joseph took them away from Yaakov’s knees. The reason was that he had not brought them to his father in the order in which he meant for them to receive their blessing. He therefore now arranged them in what he considered the appropriate order. וישתחו, he thanked his father for wanting to bestow special blessings on his sons.

מעם ברכיו, from between his knees. The word מעם occurs in this sense in connection with a table in Samuel I 20,34, מעם השלחן, it also occurs in a similar meaning in the phrase עם באר לחי רואי, (Genesis 25,11) “right by the well named by Hagar ‘the well of the Living G”d Who sees me.’”

ויוצא יוסף אתם AND JOSEPH BROUGHT THEM OUT — After he (Jacob) had kissed them, Joseph brought them out from between his knees in order to place them one at the right and the other on the left in order that Jacob might thus lay his hands upon them and bless them

וישתחו לאפיו AND HE PROSTRATED HIMSELF BEFORE HIS FACE — after he had stepped backwards from before his father.

Das Gefühl, das den Vater bei diesem Gedanken erfüllte, bemeisterte in noch höherem Grade den Sohn.

מעם ברכיו, of his father, who was embracing them.

When he stepped back from his father. It seems to me that Rashi here may be understood according to what he explained on 42:6, that “Every השתחואה implies the stretching out of the hands and feet.” Accordingly, while Yoseif was still standing before his father he could not stretch himself out. Perforce, it was “when he stepped back.” (Nachalas Yaakov)

Manasseh and Ephraim, who were still young at the time, had been standing between Joseph’s knees. Joseph took them out from between his knees, and he prostrated himself on his face to the earth. Joseph bowed not to Jacob, but to God, in preparation for the upcoming revelation. 3

“Joseph then removed them from his knees” [48:12]. Jacob kissed the children. Joseph pulled the children away from Jacob and wanted to properly place them, Menashe on the right hand of Jacob, because he was the firstborn. He wanted to place Ephraim at the left hand of Jacob to be blessed. (Rashi, Genesis, 48:12.)

After having blessed the tribes that represented the priesthood and the monarchy, the tribe that is privileged to host the holy Temple in the future, is blessed next. The fact that Benjamin is G'ds beloved is testified to by that very fact, (verse 12) A major factor is that it was the only tribe wholly uninvolved in the struggle between Joseph and his brothers. Joseph who is the mainstay of the kingdom of the ten tribes, comes next. Since Ephrayim will be the leader of that kingdom, the abundance of blessings heaped on Joseph are partly to be viewed as applying to all the ten tribes, but they are identified with Joseph who had displayed moral fortitude in his encounter with the wife of Potiphar. The reference to Joseph as an ox, has been discussed in chapter thirty. Issachar and Zevulun are named next, being the remaining sons of Jacob's major wives Rachel and Leah. Also, they complete the camp of Yehudah. Zevulun is here mentioned ahead of Issachar though he was younger, in recognition of the fact that he assumed the burden of earning a livelihood for his brother Issachar so that the latter could devote himself to Torah study, (verse 18) The "tents” referred to, are the seclusion of the yeshivah, the Torah academy. Zevulun's maritime activities will be amply rewarded so that he can afford to entertain "nations." Gad's turn is next, since he too was considered a reward from G'd by his mother for having turned her handmaid over to Jacob as a wife. Also, he completes the camp of Reuben and the unnamed Shimon. The blessing marchiv Gad, who expands Gad, refers to the fact that it was this tribe that was the first to settle on the East Bank of the Jordan. It was also he who formed the vanguard when it came to fighting for possession of the West Bank. He considered the fact that Moses, Aaron and Miriam were all buried in his tribal territory, as a good omen for his choice of location, and an insurance of the tribe's future loyalty to G'd and Torah. Dan is head of the army group forming the rearguard. His being described as a hit and run expert, fits Samson the best known of his heroes. Naftali being senior to Asher, is mentioned next. Since the chronological order has not been observed in these blessings, Moses is anxious to conclude the blessings for the individual tribes with Asher, who is not only assured of an abundance of material wealth, but is assured that this will not cause jealousy among his brothers, i.e. "he will remain popular with his brothers." (verse 24) In this way the blessings applicable to the nation as a whole in verse twenty five, are an extension of the bounty promised to Asher. Just as at the beginning of the blessings, the line "may Reuben live and not die," refers to the wish that no sudden death should cut short his normal lifespan, so also at the end of the blessings Moses expresses the wish (verse 25) "and as your young days so shall be your old age," meaning that eventual death should come about only as the result of the natural process of aging. "Riding the heavens" (verse 26), is a symbol of the speed with which G'd may come to Israel's aid when needed. The prophecies of Moses, unlike those of Bileam, are not intended for the distant future. Bileam had spoken about "I can see it, but not now" etc.; not so Moses who describes G'd as "riding the clouds" to Israel's assistance as something in the immediate future. In order to be meaningful, victory must comprise four elements. 1) The victor should emerge unharmed. 2) The enemy must have been harmed. 3) The enemy must be seen to have been hurt. 4) Such hurt must be real, not merely superficial. Moses deals with these four aspects of victory in verse twenty nine. 1) "The shield of Your help." 2) "The sword of Your excellence." 3) "Your enemies will dwindle before you," and 4) "You will tread upon their heights." You will be seen to be enjoying the fruits of victory.

[2] "And another explanation: Ephraim is a dear son to me. As it says (Hosea 11:3), "I taught Ephraim to walk." The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "I carried him and held him by his arms. When Jacob took him between his arms, as it is said (Genesis 48:13), "And Joseph took them both." Now what is written afterwards (Genesis 48:8)? "And Israel saw Joseph's sons, and said, 'Who are these?'" What did Jacob see that he asked, "Who are these?" He already knew them, as it is said (Genesis 48:5), "And now your two sons." Rather, our father Jacob foresaw that a descendant of Ephraim, namely Jeroboam son of Nebat the Ephraimite, would make two golden calves, as it is said (1 Kings 11:26), "And Jeroboam son of Nebat, an Ephraimite, took his stand." He would then say (1 Kings 12:28), "These are your gods, O Israel." Therefore, Jacob said, "Who are these?" And Joseph replied (Genesis 48:9), "These are my sons." What did Joseph do? He removed his crown from his head and released his belt (or "girdle") before Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 48:12), "And Joseph took them both." He said to him, "Do you see what sins they will commit?" Jacob answered, "I do not." Once he heard this, Joseph said to him (Genesis 48:9), "Bring them to me and I will bless them." Immediately Joseph took them both (Genesis 48:13), and Israel stretched out his right hand. When Joseph saw this, he was displeased, as it is said (Genesis 48:17), "And Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand." He said to him, "Do you think that I have no strength left in my old age? By your life, I still have as much strength as they do." But his father refused (Genesis 48:19)." "And from Menasheh fell [to] David, etc. (I Chronicles 12:20). However, his brother etc. (Genesis 48:19), this is Yehoshua who stands from Ephraim, as it says, "from the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea, son of Nun" (Numbers 13:8), who erected the wall, and all the nations of the world look and see. Therefore, "and his seed shall become a multitude of nations" (Genesis 48:19). The Holy One Blessed be He said, "I have seen how good Ephraim is; take them on my arms" (Hosea 11:3). When The Holy One Blessed be He said said, "Bring them to me" (Genesis 48:9), I was there and revealed a mystery to Jacob about Ephraim and Jeroboam, although they did not know that I had healed them (Hosea 11:3). Ephraim, the beloved son, is dear to me.

AND HE APPEARED BEFORE HIM. Joseph appeared before his father. And he wept on his neck a good while. The phrase vayeivk od signifies “weeping copiously.” Jacob, however, did not fall upon the neck of his son Joseph, nor did he kiss him. Our Rabbis said that this was because he was reciting the Shema, (the affirmation of G-d’s Unity). This is the language of Rashi. But [according to this interpretation, which says that it was Joseph who fell on his father’s neck and wept], I know of no reason for the statement, And he appeared before him, since it is understood that Joseph appeared before Jacob since he fell upon his neck. Moreover, it is not respectful for Joseph to fall upon his father’s neck. He should rather bow before him or kiss his hands, as it is written, And Joseph brought them out from between his knees, and he fell down on his face. (Further, 48:12.) And at the present moment, it was more fitting that he bow to him [than at the time referred to in the aforementioned verse]. (Further, 48:12.) So also, every term ‘od’ in Scripture indicates an addition to the original but does not imply copiousness. Thus: He doth not set a stated time ‘od’ for a man, (Job 34:23.) which means, “He sets a stated time for a man in accordance with his transgression, and nothing is added.” (We thus see that od can refer to a slight increase.) The correct interpretation appears to me to be that Israel’s eyes were already slightly dim from age, (See further, 48:10.) and when Joseph arrived in the carriage of the second in rank, (Above, 42, 43.) with a mitre on his head as was the custom of the Egyptian kings, his father did not recognize him. His brothers also had not recognized him. (Ibid., 42:8.) Therefore Scripture mentioned that when he appeared before his father, who stared at him and finally recognized him, his father fell on his neck and cried again over him, even as he had continually cried over him to this day when he had not seen him after his disappearance, and then Jacob said, Now let me die, since I have seen thy face. (Verse 31 here.) It is a known matter as to whose tears are more constant: that of an old father who finds his son alive after having despaired of him and having mourned for him, or that of a grown-up son who reigns. Do not be concerned [lest this interpretation be open to question] because Scripture immediately says, And Israel said, (Verse 30 here.) [thus implying that the previous subject is not Israel but Joseph], whereas according to our interpretation Scripture is speaking of Jacob and then mentions his name once again in the following verse. A similar case is found in these verses: And he gathered up all the foods of the seven years, etc., (Above, 41:48.) [where Joseph is the subject of the verse, and yet Scripture mentions his name in the succeeding verse], And unto Joseph were born two sons. (Ibid., Verse 50.) There are constantly many similar places in the Torah and in the other books of Scripture.

Yoseif brought them out from between his knees [before him], and he prostrated himself with his face to the ground.

And Joseph brought them out from (between) his knees, and worshipped on his face upon the ground.

ויקח יוסף, “Joseph had already taken.” [Contrary to the past tense mode with the vav hahippuch . Ed] This verse ought to be understood as following verse 9.

AND JOSEPH TOOK THEM BOTH. Its meaning is: And Joseph had taken them both. (In other words va-yikkach (took) is a pluperfect that means had taken. In verse 9 we are told that Jacob told Joseph, Bring them (your sons), I pray thee, unto me, and I will bless them. Verse 10, while stating that Jacob kissed them, does not state that Joseph brought them to his father. This is stated in verse 13. Filwarg in keeping with his interpretation of I.E., viz., that verses 9-12 summarize what happened and verses 13-20 tell in detail what occurred, interprets as follows: Scripture is about to relate the details of the blessing. It begins by telling that Joseph had brought his children to his father in the following manner, Ephraim in his right hand and Manasseh in his left hand.) I have already noted many other such instances. (Of the pluperfect in Scripture. See I.E.’s comments on Gen. 1:9.)

ויקח יוסף את שניהם, “Joseph took both of them, etc.” He presented them to his father in the proper order, Menashe the older one on his father’s right, and Ephrayim the younger one on his father’s left. Yaakov realised that this was the order in which Joseph would place his sons before him. This is why he crossed his arms in order to place his right hand on the head of Ephrayim on the left hand on the head of Menashe. He possessed sufficient divine inspiration to foresee that historically Ephrayim would be of greater significance than his senior brother Menashe. This is why he said of Menashe (verse 19) “he too will become a nation, however his younger brother will be greater than he.” According to Rabbeinu Chananel, Yaakov did not actually cross his arms but he placed his hands one on top of the other. What the Rabbi meant was that Yaakov did not rearrange the position of the boys but the position of his hands. This does not seem right. We do not need Rabbeinu Chananel to tell us this as the Torah had already made it plain that the lads remained in their respective positions but that Yaakov crossed his hands! The correct interpretation of Rabbeinu Chananel appears to be that the words שכל את ידיו, “he rearranged his hands” mean that relative to Joseph he rearranged his hands. When the Torah said: “he placed his right hand on the head of Ephrayim,” the meaning is that he rearranged the boys and placed them so that Ephrayim was opposite his right hand, etc. He also rearranged the position of Menashe so that he stood opposite Yaakov’s left hand. He did not rearrange his own hands at all. All he did was to rearrange the position of the boys. This is the correct meaning of the words שכל את ידיו, i.e. he rearranged them differently from the way Joseph had arranged them. The blessing took effect as a result of Yaakov placing his hands firmly on the heads of the lads. We find something similar in Numbers 27,23 where Moses placed his hands on Joshua and proceeded to bless him, making him his successor. The act of placing one’s hands on the person one blesses is designed to facilitate the transfer of the holy spirit possessed by the one conferring the blessing to the recipient of said blessing. When the sages of old ordained someone they also literally placed their hands on the head of the person so ordained. In the case of the priests blessing the people this was physically impossible. Instead the priest spread his hands heavenwards in a gesture commanding G’d’s blessing on all those present. This is the deeper meaning of the words שכל את ידיו, the word שכל being derived from שכל,חכמה, “intelligence, wisdom.” The ten fingers are to be the instrument which draws down blessings from its celestial source.

כי מנשה הבכור, “although Menashe was the first-born.” Yaakov ignored this biological phenomenon as the younger of Joseph’s sons displayed signs of spiritual superiority. The use of the word כי in the sense of “although” is not unique. We find it being used in the same sense in Psalms 41,5 רפאה נפשי כי חטאתי לך, “heal me although I have sinned against You.” Another example of the use of the word כי in the sense of ”although” is found in our daily prayer: “forgive us our Father although we have sinned.” It would certainly not be logical to translate the words סלח לנו אבינו כי חטאנו, “forgive us our Father for we have sinned.”

בימינו, on Joseph’s right, which was the left side of Yaakov (Yisrael)

את אפרים בימינו, in order to place him on Israel’s left side, (seeing he was the younger).

את אפרים בימינו משמאל ישראל EPHRAIM ON HIS RIGHT HAND TOWARDS ISRAEL’S LEFT — If one is moving towards another person his right hand is opposite the other’s left. Now since he (Manasseh) was the first-born he was marked out for the blessing and should have been placed at Jacob’s right hand.

Joseph took the two of them: He brought Ephraim, his younger son, in his right hand, so that he would be to the left of Israel, who was opposite him, with the younger son on his father’s left side, in the customary manner. And he took Manasseh, his older son, in his left hand, to the right of Israel, and he had them approach him.

[2] "And another explanation: Ephraim is a dear son to me. As it says (Hosea 11:3), "I taught Ephraim to walk." The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "I carried him and held him by his arms. When Jacob took him between his arms, as it is said (Genesis 48:13), "And Joseph took them both." Now what is written afterwards (Genesis 48:8)? "And Israel saw Joseph's sons, and said, 'Who are these?'" What did Jacob see that he asked, "Who are these?" He already knew them, as it is said (Genesis 48:5), "And now your two sons." Rather, our father Jacob foresaw that a descendant of Ephraim, namely Jeroboam son of Nebat the Ephraimite, would make two golden calves, as it is said (1 Kings 11:26), "And Jeroboam son of Nebat, an Ephraimite, took his stand." He would then say (1 Kings 12:28), "These are your gods, O Israel." Therefore, Jacob said, "Who are these?" And Joseph replied (Genesis 48:9), "These are my sons." What did Joseph do? He removed his crown from his head and released his belt (or "girdle") before Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 48:12), "And Joseph took them both." He said to him, "Do you see what sins they will commit?" Jacob answered, "I do not." Once he heard this, Joseph said to him (Genesis 48:9), "Bring them to me and I will bless them." Immediately Joseph took them both (Genesis 48:13), and Israel stretched out his right hand. When Joseph saw this, he was displeased, as it is said (Genesis 48:17), "And Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand." He said to him, "Do you think that I have no strength left in my old age? By your life, I still have as much strength as they do." But his father refused (Genesis 48:19)." "And from Menasheh fell [to] David, etc. (I Chronicles 12:20). However, his brother etc. (Genesis 48:19), this is Yehoshua who stands from Ephraim, as it says, "from the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea, son of Nun" (Numbers 13:8), who erected the wall, and all the nations of the world look and see. Therefore, "and his seed shall become a multitude of nations" (Genesis 48:19). The Holy One Blessed be He said, "I have seen how good Ephraim is; take them on my arms" (Hosea 11:3). When The Holy One Blessed be He said said, "Bring them to me" (Genesis 48:9), I was there and revealed a mystery to Jacob about Ephraim and Jeroboam, although they did not know that I had healed them (Hosea 11:3). Ephraim, the beloved son, is dear to me.

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:55). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]…” – do not read it as kaarat, but rather as akart, corresponding to Jacob, who extracted [akar] the birthright (The birthright refers to the extra portion of the inheritance that the eldest son received.) from Reuben and gave it to Joseph: “I have given you one portion more than your brothers…” (Genesis 48:22). “Silver” – just as it says: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20), just as he (Silver alludes to the statement made by Jacob, who was righteous.) said: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be for me like Reuben and Simeon” (Genesis 48:5). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – when Jacob descended to Egypt on account of Joseph, he was one hundred and thirty years old, as it is stated: “Jacob said to Pharaoh: The days of the years of my residence are one hundred and thirty years” (Genesis 47:9). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – corresponding to Joseph, who was cast [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “Silver” – after: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20) – what he said to his father (Silver alludes to the statement made by Joseph, who was righteous.) : “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn; place your right hand upon his head” (Genesis 48:18). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel” – as it was through him that seventy people descended to Egypt. “Both of them full…” – Jacob and Joseph, both of them were full-fledged righteous men and both produced tribes. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:56). “One gold ladle of ten shekels…” – corresponding to the ten districts of Manasseh, as it is stated: “Ten districts fell to Manasseh” (Joshua 17:5). “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:57). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:58). “One young bull, one ram [one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering]; one goat…” – these (This is a reference to the three burnt offerings.) are three corresponding to the three generations that Joseph saw from Manasseh that received a portion in the land, (This is a reference to the fact that there were three major families named after the three generations following Manasseh, in addition to the family which was named after Manasseh himself. Therefore, the phrase “the sons of Makhir” refers to Makhir himself, Gilad, and Iezer.) as it is stated: “The children of Makhir son of Manasseh, too, were born at Joseph’s knees” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise, it says: “The sons of Manasseh: For Makhir, the family of the Makhirites, and Makhir begot Gilad.… These are the sons of Gilad: Of Iezer…” (Numbers 26:29–30). Makhir, Gilad, and Iezer – these are three generations that were patrilineal houses that were attributed to Joseph, as Manasseh is attributed to Jacob, just as it says: “And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before my coming to you to Egypt, they are mine” (Genesis 48:5). The fourth, this was Ya’ir son of Manasseh, who received a portion in the land, just as it says: “Ya’ir son of Manasseh went and captured their villages [ḥavot], and he called them Ḥavot Ya’ir” (Numbers 32:41). The three species of burnt offerings corresponded to the sons of Makhir son of Manasseh. (This is referring to what was mentioned above, and is mentioned again since the midrash now also explains what the sin offering signifies.) The goat sin offering corresponded to Ya’ir, who did not bequeath his portion to his sons, because he did not have sons. That is why he called them (The villages.) by his name, because he did not have any remnant, and the sons of his brother Makhir inherited his portion. “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Gamliel son of Pedatzur” (Numbers 7:59). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the tribe of Manasseh, which split into two and received two portions in the land, half of it on the east bank of the Jordan and half in the land of Canaan. “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these are three species, corresponding to three things that Joseph did on behalf of Manasseh, whom he sought to elevate over his brother Ephraim. The first: “Joseph took the two of them, Ephraim in his right hand to the left of Israel, and Manasseh in his left hand to the right of Israel” (Genesis 48:13). The second: “He supported his father’s hand, to remove it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh” (Genesis 48:17). The third: “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn…” (Genesis 48:18). Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five women from the tribe of Manasseh who took a portion in the land. These were Tzelofḥad’s five daughters, just as it says: “Tzelofḥad’s daughters speak justly; give them a holding for inheritance…” (Numbers 27:7). They were five, as it is stated: “These are the names of his daughters: Maḥla, Noa, Ḥogla, Milka, and Tirtza” (Numbers 27:1). Likewise, Jacob mentioned them in the blessing of Joseph, as it is stated: “Branches [banot] ran atop the wall [alei shur]” (Genesis 49:22); these are Tzelofḥad’s daughters [banot], who received a portion in the land. Alternatively, why were they five each? It corresponds to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “May they proliferate like fish in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16), and fish were created on the fifth day. “This was the offering of Gamliel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Gamliel…”

"But with a lot, etc." (Numbers 26:55). This is [the meaning of] that which is stated (Proverbs 18:18), "The lot puts an end to strife." Since a sign was written for each and every tribe from Yaakov - "Zevulun will dwell on the shore of the seas" (Genesis 49:13); "Yissachar is a boney donkey, etc." (Genesis 49:14); "From Asher, his bread is fat" (Genesis 49:20) - you are only permitted to divide [the land] by the lot. And there were miraculous acts in the lottery: Elazar the Priest wears the Urim and Tumim. And the slips of the lottery were in front of Yehoshua, as stated (Joshua 18:6) "And I will cast the lot for you here in front of the Lord, our God." But before the lot went up, Elazar said with the holy spirit, "The lot of tribe x is coming up, to take place y." And Yehoshua would extend his hand and [it] would come up [into his hand. It was] as it is stated (Joshua 19:51), "These are the inheritances that Elazar the Priest and Yehoshua ben Nun apportioned." And this was [even] more; that the lot would yell out at the time that it went up, "I am the lot of tribe x; I have gone up to it in place y." And from where [do we know] that the lot speaks? As it is stated (Numbers 26:56), "By the mouth of (according to) the lot."

... [What about all] the praise of Joseph, who exceeded in the honor of his father? And yet he did not enter into him all the time, such that were it not that they came to tell him, "Your father is sick," he would not have known! Rather this is to inform you of his righteousness. For he did not want to be alone with his father, lest he say to him, "How did your brothers act with you?" And [then] he would curse them.... Hence he did not go to his father all the time.)

זכרנו את הדגה, “we remember the fish, etc.” the word דגה for fish, we have found already in Yaakov’s blessing for Joseph and his children in Genesis 48,13: וידגו לרוב בקרב הארץ, “may they multiply as fish on the face of the earth.” The Torah then lists details of the food the Israelites claimed to have had in abundance in Egypt, all for free.

[27] The same truth is borne out by the story of the sons of Joseph, a story which shews rich and careful thought. The sage, we read, under inspiration lays his hands on the heads of the boys who stood opposite him, but lays them not straight in front but crosswise, meaning to touch with his left hand the boy who seemed the elder and the younger with his right (Gen. 48:13, 14).

Yoseif took the two [of them]—Ephraim in his right [hand], toward Yisrael’s left, and Menasheh in his left, toward Yisrael’s right—and he brought them near to him.

And Joseph took both of them, Ephraim on his right side, which was Israel's left, and Menasheh on his left side, which was Israel's right, and brought them to him.

Therefore, one who is spiritually sensitive should direct his will so that he draws the blessing of SeKheL (intellect). This is as in (Genesis 48:14), “He SiKeL (crossed) his hands.” This also corresponds to (Exodus 15:17), “A sanctuary, God, may Your hands establish.”

“… guiding his hands intentionally [Yaakov moving his right hand over his left to place it on Efriam for the blessing] ….” (Bereshit, 48:14) Since the attribute of Yitzchak Avinu was that of Gevurah (strength), he wanted to bless Eisav, because the attribute of Gevurah teaches of the Torah, as it is written (Megillah 31b), “[at Sinai] Moshe heard from the mouth of Gevurah.” Therefore it says, “let the judgment [Din, Gevurah] cut through the mountain [meaning to follow the judgment under all circumstances].” This is why it was not in Yitzchak’s power to go against the judgment, and he wanted to give the blessing to Eisav since he was the elder son. Yet since God supports the pure of hand, for the hands are branches of the heart, and his heart was pure and refined, then the result was that Yaakov would bless without (or independent of) his own knowledge. Therefore it is written (Tehilim, 16:5), “You support my fate,” yet Yaakov Avinu always looked towards the understanding and God’s will. Therefore he said, “I knew, my son, I knew,” “guiding his hands intentionally,” placing Efriam before Menashe.

וישת על ראש אפרים, “he placed it (his right hand) on the head of Ephrayim.” He did so with the intent of including them in the 12 tribes. We find a similar expression when Moses placed his hands on Joshua appointing him as his successor (Numbers 27,23).

שכל את ידיו, “Yaakov placed his hands by using his intelligence, i.e. sechel. One could have thought that instead of crossing his hands, Yaakov should have asked that the sons of Joseph switch their position in front of their grandfather, but that is precisely what Yaakov did not want them to do. He did not want to embarrass Menashe by relegating him to his left side, seeing that after all he was Joseph’s firstborn, and he deserved to be treated with respect on account of this. The only reason he had not placed his right hand on the head of Menashe, was that he had seen through his holy spirit that his younger brother would historically be of greater importance than the first born. It occurs frequently that the word “כי,” means “although;” for instance: Psalms 41,5: כי חטאתי לך, “although I have sinned against You.” Or, Psalms 25,11: כי רב הוא, “although it is great.” Or, Exodus 13,17: כי קרוב הוא, “although it is nearby.” The author states that he could have quoted many more examples.

שכל את ידיו, seeing that Joseph had lined them up with Menashe on Yaakov’s right side, he was forced to cross his hand in order to give Ephrayim his blessing with his right hand. Although Menashe was Joseph’s firstborn son, Yaakov wished to place his right hand on the head of Ephrayim. We encounter a similar situation in the Book of Daniel,9,9 [where the author recalls G–d’s merciful attitude of forgiving before even having mentioned why that forgiveness was required. Ed.]

He guided his hands for Menashe was the firstborn. It is extra for we known from the parsha that Menashe was the firstborn. But this has depth and intension for truthfully, Yaakov shouldn't have guided (crossed) his hands, rather switched the positions of the boys. But since Menashe was the firstborn, he intended that Menashe should stand by Yaakov's right leg and Efrayim by his left leg. Only his hands did he guide that they should be crossed. The reason is that even though Yaakov put Efrayim before Menashe and therefore in the wilderness he was the head of his flag group (which Menashe was also a part of) still, in the counting of Parshas Pinchas, it was the opposite. Not only that, but even in the counting of Parshas Bamidbar it is written by all the (other) flags "and those that camp upon him" as opposed to with Menashe it is written, "and upon him the tribe of Menashe." All this comes to teach us that Efrayim only came before Menashe in matters of spirituality, that which is higher than the natural happenings of the world. In matters of the world, however, Menashe came before Efrayim. Therefore in the first counting at Mt. Chorev, where the Divine precence was upon their heads and the conduct was beyond nature, Efrayim came first. But in the counting in the Plains of Moav, when they were entering the Land, which was basically in a natural way (as is explained later in Bamidbar and Devarim) therefore Menashe came first. (And check out what I write in Bamidbar regarding the change of "and upon him the tribe of Menashe." The occurred because with regards to natural occurrences, the advantage of the firstborn is very impactful as I wrote earlier (27:19). Now, the hand services the head and the mind and the foot services the goings of the body according to its nature. That's why the Sages said in their way: The son is the foot of the father. Meaning: the natural mannerisms of the father that goes on its own without thought and wisdom. Therefore, Jacob desired that Menashe stand by his right leg and guided his hands so that Efrayim would be on his right hand. See more in Verse 20. That is why the verse specified "because Menashe was the firstborn."

GUIDING HIS HANDS WITTINGLY. His hands, as it were, understood what he wanted to do. (The verse reads: sikkel et yadov, which literally means, he imparted wisdom to his hands. Hence his hands “understood” his intentions.)

FOR MANASSEH WAS THE FIRST-BORN. Even though (ki) Manasseh was the first-born. (In other words, ki (for) is to be rendered even though, i.e., Jacob placed his left hand upon Manasseh’s head even though Manasseh was the first born.) The word ki in O Lord, let the Lord…go in the midst of us, even though (ki) it is a stiff-necked people (Ex. 34:9) is similar. There are many similar instances. (Where the word ki has the meaning of even though.)

שכל את ידיו כי כי מנשה הבכור, he placed his hands deliberately, keeping in mind that Menashe was the firstborn. Many feel that the word כי may best be understood as "although."

I think that we have to understand the verse in conjunction with the previous statement that Jacob's eyesight was failing. As a result he could not recognise which of the two grandchildren was the older one. When it came to the blessing he used his wits to compensate for his eyesight and reasoned that surely Joseph had placed the sons in such a position that the elder one would be blessed by his right hand and the younger one by his placing his left hand on him. He reversed his hands because he wanted to place his right hand on the head of the younger son Ephrayim.

שכל את ידיו, he crisscrossed his hands [so that the right hand was pointed to the left and the left to the right].

שכל את ידיו, he conferred intelligence to his hands, so that they appeared to act intelligently on their own, seeing that Menashe was the firstborn and Yaakov saw with prophetic vision that he would be the “smaller one,” in the sense that his future would reflect less blessing than the future of his younger brother. Had he placed his right hand on Menashe, what intelligence would this have demon-strated? [the author surely means that the Torah does not have to speak about an act of special intelligence being required to put one’s right hand on the older of the two sons. Ed.]

שכל את ידיו, as if the Torah had written שכל, both the letters ש and כ with the vowels kametz, resulting in sachal, meaning something distorted, bent out of shape.

כי מנשה הבכור, and Yaakov was well aware even without being able to recognise the sons’ features, that Joseph would position his firstborn son on his father’s right side. Seeing that he wanted to place his right hand on the younger son, Ephrayim, he had to cross his hands to accomplish this.

שכל את ידיו PLACING HIS HANDS DESIGNEDLY — Understand this as the Targum renders it: אחכמינון he put wisdom into them (viz., into his hands), meaning designedly and wisely he moved his hands for this purpose, intelligently and with full knowledge, for he knew that Manasseh was the first-born and yet he did not place his right hand upon him.

שיכל את ידיא, he was quite clear, relying on his sense of touch, without being able to see exactly where his hands came to rest.

For he well knew that Menasheh was the firstborn and, nevertheless... Rashi is answering the question: The word כי in Scripture usually comes to explain what preceded. But according to Onkelos, who explains שִׂכֵל as “wisdom,” how does [“Menasheh was the firstborn”] explain [what preceded]? Thus Rashi explains [that here, כי does not explain what preceded. It rather means:] “And, nevertheless.” In other words, [כי means:] even though he knew that Menasheh was the firstborn. And this was the wisdom, as it says, “I know my son, I know” (v. 19). Maharshal writes: Many explain that [according to Rashi, this] כי means “even though.” But it seems not so. Rather, this is how the verse flows. It says, “He deliberately placed his hands,” and then explains why he did this instead of telling Yoseif to rearrange them with Ephraim to his right and Menasheh to his left. [The explanation is:] “Because Menasheh was the firstborn.” In other words, since Menasheh was the firstborn he did not want to embarrass him.

Contrary to Joseph’s expectation that Jacob would extend his hands directly across onto his sons’ heads, Israel extended his right hand, which was opposite Manasseh, and laid it upon the head of Ephraim, who was the younger brother, and his left hand he extended upon the head of Manasseh, deliberately placing his hands , 4 as he was aware that Manasseh was the firstborn . 5 Alternatively, the verse means: Although Manasseh was the firstborn. 6

“Crossed his hands” [48:14]. Jacob knew well that Joseph would put Menashe at his right hand and Ephraim at his left hand. Even though Jacob did not see well, but he also knew prophetically that Ephraim would have many more important descendants than would Menashe. Therefore, Jacob crossed his hands with wisdom and understanding. That is, he put his right hand on Ephraim, the younger one, and he put his left hand on Menashe, and this was the wisdom, even though Joseph had placed Menashe at Jacob’s right hand. Jacob did not want to shame or disgrace Menashe by telling him to go to the left hand. This would be a disgrace because he was the firstborn. Therefore, Jacob allowed him to remain standing where Joseph had placed him. However, Jacob crossed his hands, so that the right hand was on Ephraim. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:14.)

“Although Menashe was the first born” [48:14]. This means, that even though Menashe was the firstborn, he did not want to disgrace him and crossed his hands. Hizkuni gives an additional explanation, and Bahya also gives this explanation. “Although Menashe was the first born” [48:14], means that although Menashe was the firstborn, it was just that Jacob should put his right hand on Ephraim. Jacob did this because he saw prophetically that Ephraim, the younger one, would have better children than Menashe. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 48:14; Bahya, Genesis, 48:13.)

At the creation, we find no evidence that birthright was part of the rules guiding the affairs of man. Proof lies in the random order the names of Noach's sons are referred to on different occasions. This was changed when Abraham appeared on the stage of history. His descendants were to play a leading role due to their being descendants of Abraham. In effect G-d had said, "Until now I have bestowed blessings, henceforth I grant Abraham the authority to bestow and direct blessings" (Genesis 12,3). Abraham debated with himself if he were to bestow this power to bless on others. Since he was not certain that he might help weeds to sprout (promote the power of wicked people), if he took it upon himself to transfer this power to bless, he decided to leave well enough alone (Bereshit Rabbah 61). He waited for G-d to make His will known in the matter. G-d did bless his son Isaac (gave him the power to bestow blessings). Since Abraham had two first born sons, he would have had to bestow the blessing (power to bless) on both of them. He was afraid to err; on the other hand, the trait of "chessed," kindness, for which he was famed would not allow him to deprive Ishmael of a share in favor of Isaac. This in spite of the fact that he knew that his descendants would be known primarily through Isaac. Therefore, considering himself as the manager of the Almighty's orchard, he decided to leave this decision to the owner of the orchard. After Abraham's death, the owner chose Isaac, and thus we come to point two in our parable. When twins were born to Isaac, the older of whom exhibited signs of unfitness, problem three in our parable, this had to be dealt with. Isaac, true to his characteristic of pachad, din, i.e. justice, which our sages have credited him with, did not dare deviate from the principle of transferring power in accordance with birthright. When Jacob says some time later that "the One whom Isaac feared was on my side" (Genesis 31,42), this grants us an insight into the matter. An examination of all the instances in which a direct relationship or communication between G-d and Isaac is described reveals that the term used for "G-d" is invariably elokim, i.e. the attribute of justice. The only exception is the instance when G-d tells Abraham that Isaac is not to be slaughtered after all. This latter instance which taught Abraham that rachamim, mercy is one of G-d’s attributes, is the only time when this factor emerges as playing a role in the relationship between G-d and Isaac. It is understandable then that Isaac of all people would not deviate from the pattern of nobility of birth decreed from above. Isaac's own position as Abraham's heir was due to this very system. Add to this that Isaac personally had not observed any misconduct in Esau, and it becomes clear why he chose Esau to bestow the blessing on. Jacob himself had been very careful never to tell his father of the sale of the birthright, since he had kept hoping that he would secure his father's blessing by virtue of his superior moral conduct, plus the influence of his mother. He did not want to benefit by exposing his brother's unworthiness. This trait of Jacob was very laudable. Leviticus 25,36 tells us, "Your brother shall live alongside you." Our sages explain that this wording teaches that one's own life takes precedence over that of one's fellow man in a situation where only one of the two lives can be saved. If the object of one's quest for Divine help is personality growth rather than the acquisition of worldly goods, then competing for the attainment of that goal is permissible. Aristotle also states in his Ethics that self-love, when its objective is perfection of self, is virtuous. Our sages, when describing jealousy as a negative trait, do approve of jealousy when it involves envying scholars who know more (Baba Batra 25). The same idea is reflected in Bereshit Rabbah 71 in connection with Rachel's jealousy of her sister Leah (Genesis 30,1). She envied Leah her good deeds. This is why our sages can consider that kind of jealousy a positive quality. On the other hand, "good" character traits employed for a base purpose are viewed as a negative quality (compare Chapter 27 on Dinah). Our problem is to determine whether jealousy under the circumstances described is permitted even when the attainment of one's own purpose involves something detrimental to one's competitor. Consider the definition by our sages of the commandment "Love your fellow man like yourself." The Talmud Shabbat 31 explains this to mean " do not do to others that which is hateful to yourself." Aristotle defines it in a similar vein. In other words, we should want for our fellow man what we want for ourselves. We certainly do not need to want for our fellow man what he wants for himself. This is especially so, when our fellow man is wicked or a criminal. In Psalms 139,21, David expresses it in these words: "Must I not hate those who hate You O Lord, and quarrel with those who rise up against You?" Clearly the word "fellow man" referred to in the Torah means someone sharing the same objectives in life that we ourselves believe in. Since Jacob's motivations corresponded to the ones stipulated by our sages, the verse we quoted from Psalms may be applied to him. Having established this point, we return to item four in our parable. The problem is how to restore the position of leadership to those qualified for it. It does not suffice to deny G-d’s special blessings to the undeserving, rather action is needed to channel those blessings to those who deserve them. When Jacob blessed his grandsons prior to his death, he reversed his hands to ensure that Ephrayim would be the recipient of the greater blessing. Er, the firstborn son of Yehudah, is described as unfit, unworthy. Peretz and Zerach respectively, are not treated according to what the order of their birth would call for. Reuben, Jacob's firstborn, is not accorded the privileges his birthright calls for. David was not Yishai's firstborn, neither was Solomon the senior of the surviving sons of David when he was assured that he would be his father's successor. To prove that birthright as an automatic claim to the succession was not practiced at the time of the Exodus, see Numbers 3,3. G-d says, "The day I smote all the firstborn of Egypt, I established an exclusive claim on all the firstborn of Israel." Obviously, if succession by birthright had been the norm at that time, there would have been no need for G-d to underline that only from that day on would G-d claim the firstborn of Israel as especially beholden to Him. We see then that the practice of succession by birthright had been discontinued at some time, only to be re-introduced at the time of the Exodus. Later, after the episode of the golden calf, when this method of succession had again been found unreliable, the privileges of that group were transferred to the tribe of Levi which had proved its worthiness. This then is the fifth rule that we learned from our parable. Now we understand what the Midrash quoted at the beginning of our chapter had in mind. Since Jacob may well have been aware that the privileges of the firstborn would be abolished once the tabernacle was to be erected, why did he risk his life merely in order to hasten that event? The question is even more justified when we consider that Jacob derived no practical advantage from all his machinations. There is no mention of Jacob ever having offered sacrifices in his capacity as firstborn, and if he had done so, the fact would no doubt have come to the attention of his father. His father could not then have been surprised when he heard from Esau some forty-eight years later, that the latter had traded away his birthright. The Midrash wishes us to know that if Jacob's actions had been motivated by materialistic considerations, this would have been most dishonorable; since he was guided by the desire to secure for himself a higher spiritual level, however, such purpose was laudable. Jacob was aware that the heter bamot, permission to erect altars for G-d wherever one wanted, in order to draw down G-d’s blessing, could lead to grievous abuse if the excercise of the priestly functions was left in the hands of the unworthy. Such abuse would lead to G-d’s blessings being channelled to those who were undeserving, something that could not be pleasing in the eyes of G-d. Therefore, he hastened to restore the source of blessing to those who were fit for it for as long as the condition "wherever I allow My name to be mentioned, I will come and grant My blessing," existed (Exodus 20,24). He realized that at a later stage a central site for the residence of the shechinah, Divine Presence, would be established, and that then the function of priesthood would be performed only in that central place (tabernacle or temple) and only by priests who had to meet exacting criteria of physical and moral fitness.

Similarly, the remediation of any creation requires an effluence reaching it and effecting such remediation through agents of which we have no knowledge. But when this remediation comes through a supplicant, it would seem that this supplicant himself is a mediating agent through which the effluence comes to rest upon the object of his supplications. For this reason, when Eliyahu brought back to life the son of the widow of Zarefat (I Kings 17:21), he stretched himself out upon him three times, the boy's substance thereby being readapted for the reception of life. And Elisha, too, when he brought back to life the son of the Shunamite woman (II Kings 4:34), lay down upon him and placed his mouth to his mouth, instructing first (Ibid 29): "and lay my staff upon the face of the child." And Jacob, likewise, said (Genesis 48:9): "Take them to me and I will bless them," and he placed his hands upon them. All of this demonstrates that the effluence is conditioned for the object of the blessing through the agency of him who pronounces the blessing or the prayer, for which reason it is desirable that the first be in close proximity to the second or even in contact with him if possible.

As in and he laid his right hand on the head of Efraim [see Gen. 48:14 ( and Gen. 48:17 }] -- The head of Efraim is the spiritual side of Mashiach ben Yosef who is aided by the abundance of Lovingkindness from the right side. This is what is meant by “his right hand on the head of Efraim.” Among the hints of the Gaon, is that in gematria equals [832]. Also, among the hints of the Gaon (according to my father, my teacher, R’ Benyamin), equals ! [1062 ] [Isa. 33:20] “visualize Zion, the city of our designated time”.

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:49). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]….” – this is the offering that he presented in the name of Jacob, who had him precede Manasseh, and in the name of Joseph, who, because of his love, Jacob blessed him all those blessings, just as it says: “He blessed Joseph and said: The God [before whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked…]” (Genesis 48:15), and it says: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh…” (Genesis 48:20). “Dish [kaarat]” – this is Jacob; do not read it as kaarat, but rather, as akeret, who uprooted [akar] the right hand from Manasseh in favor of Ephraim. “Silver” – after, “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20); what he said to Joseph: “His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know; he too shall become a people…” (Genesis 48:19). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – corresponding to the one hundred and thirty words that there are from “he laid it on Ephraim’s head” (Genesis 48:14) until “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – this is Joseph, who was cast away [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “One” – as he was king in Egypt, just as it says: “One of the people (Avimelekh said this referring to himself.) almost lay [with your wife]” (Genesis 26:10). Likewise it says: “Joseph was the ruler over the land…” (Genesis 42:6). “Silver” – after “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver,” as due to his wisdom he was privileged to achieve kingship, just as it says: “After God has disclosed all this to you.… You will be in charge of my house…” (Genesis 41:39–40). “Seventy shekels in the sacred shekel” – as Gabriel came and added one letter from the name of the Holy One blessed be He to his name and taught him seventy languages, as it is stated: “He established it as a precept for Joseph [bihosef] (He added a heh, changing Joseph [Yosef] to Yehosef.) when he went out over Egypt; I learned a language I had not known” (Psalms 81:6), as were it not so, the Egyptians would not have accepted Joseph to rule over them. “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” – Jacob and Joseph were both full-fledged righteous men, and the two of them resembled one another. This accords with what Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph” (Genesis 37:2). It should have said nothing other than: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Reuben.” Why is it stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”? It is to teach you that Joseph resembled his father in every respect. Just as Jacob was born circumcised, so too, Joseph was born circumcised. Just as this one, his mother was barren, so too, that one, his mother was barren. Just as this one, his mother suffered from the pain of her pregnancy, so too that one, his mother suffered during birth. Just as this one, his mother bore two, so too that one, his mother bore two. Just as this one, his brother seeks to kill him, this one, too, his brothers seek to kill him. This one, his brother hates [soneh] him, and that one, likewise. This one is a shepherd and that one is a shepherd. This one is hated [nistam] and that one is hated. (See Genesis 27:41, 49:23.) This one was stolen from twice: “Stolen in the day and stolen at night” (Genesis 31:39); that one, there is a double expression of stealing: “For I was abducted [gunov gunavti] [from the land of the Hebrews]” (Genesis 40:15). This one was blessed with ten blessings, (See Genesis 27:28–29.) and that one was blessed with ten blessings. (See Deuteronomy 33:13–17.) This one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel, and that one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel. This one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel, and that one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel. This one begot children outside of the Land of Israel, and that one begot children outside of the Land of Israel. This one, angels accompanied him, and that one, angels accompanied him. (A midrash says that when Joseph went to his brothers at the behest of his father, three angels accompanied him.) This one ascended to greatness by means of a dream (See Genesis 28:10–16.) and that one ascended to greatness by means of a dream. This one, his father-in-law’s household was blessed on his account, and that one, his father-in-law’s (According to Bereshit Rabba 86:3, Joseph’s father-in-law Potifera was Potifar.) household was blessed on his account. This one descended to Egypt, and that one descended to Egypt. This one ended the famine and that one ended the famine. (See Bereshit Rabba 89:9.) This one administered an oath to his son, and that one administered an oath to his brothers. This one died in Egypt, and that one died in Egypt. This one was embalmed, and that one was embalmed. This one, his bones ascended, and that one, his bones ascended. Because Joseph resembled his father, that is why it is stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”; and that is why it is stated: “Both of them full…” – regarding Jacob and Joseph. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:50). “One…ladle [kaf]” – it corresponds to the palm of his right hand, which he placed on Ephraim’s head. Why does it call it “one”? It is because it is more significant than the left. “Gold…ten shekels” – it corresponds to the ten words that there are from: “Israel extended his right hand” (Genesis 48:14) until “and he was the younger” (Genesis 48:14). “Filled with incense” – Jacob saw this matter through the divine spirit, that Ephraim was worthy for him to place his right hand on his head. Likewise it says: “Guiding [sikel] his hands, as Manasseh was the first born” (Genesis 48:14). His hands were guided [hiskilu] by the divine spirit, just as it says: “Maskil of Eitan the Ezraḥite” (Psalms 89:1). (This is a psalm stated by Eitan the Ezraḥite with divine guidance.) “One young bull, one ram, one sheep in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:51). “One young [ben bakar] bull” – corresponding to Abraham, as it is stated: “Abraham ran to the cattle [habakar]” (Genesis 18:7). “One ram” – corresponding to Isaac, in whose regard it is written: “[Abraham…] took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son” (Genesis 22:13). “One sheep” – corresponding to Jacob, in whose regard it is written: “Jacob separated the sheep” (Genesis 30:40). Why did he sacrifice these three kinds of burnt offerings? It corresponds to the three patriarchs, corresponding to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “Let my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, be called upon them” (Genesis 48:16). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:52). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Elishama son of Amihud” (Numbers 7:53). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to Joseph, as it is written: “They slaughtered a goat” (Genesis 37:31). Why did he sacrifice this corresponding to Joseph? It is because when Jacob blessed them with the name of the three patriarchs, likewise, he blessed them with the name of Joseph and made them dependent upon him, as it is stated: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the two blessings that he blessed them: the former, “[may the angel…] bless the lads” (Genesis 48:16), and the latter, “by you Israel shall bless….” “Five rams, [five goats, five lambs]” – three species, corresponding to three generations that Joseph saw for Ephraim, who were attributed to Joseph, and they were patrilineal houses, as it is stated: “Joseph saw great-grandchildren from Ephraim” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise it says: “These are the sons of Ephraim by their families: Of Shutelaḥ.… And these are the sons of Shutelaḥ: Of Eran…” (Numbers 26:35–36). Ephraim, Shutelaḥ, Eran, these are three sons from three generations. Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five words (In the Hebrew phrase.) of “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20), as it is from there that Ephraim merited to present his offering first. “This was the offering…” – because he presented the offering in this order, the Holy One blessed be He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Elishama….”

“And to Shem, father of all the children of Ever, brother of Yefet the eldest, children were also born” (Genesis 10:21). “And to Shem, father of all the children of Ever…[brother of Yefet the eldest] (This phrase could also be translated: the elder brother of Yefet.) ” – we do not know whether Shem is the eldest or Yefet is the eldest. From what is written: “These are the descendants of Shem. Shem was one hundred years old, and he begot Arpakhshad two years after the Flood” (Genesis 11:10), (Noah’s eldest son was born when he was five hundred year old (Genesis 5:32), and the Flood began when he was six hundred years old (Genesis 7:6), so Noah’s eldest son was one hundred years old when the Flood began. Shem, however, turned one hundred two years after the Flood.) we see that Yefet was the eldest. “Two sons were born to Ever; the name of the one was Peleg, as in his days the world was divided, and the name of his brother was Yoktan” (Genesis 10:25). “Two sons were born to Ever; the name of the one was Peleg, as in his days the world was divided” – Rabbi Yosei says: The ancients, because they knew their ancestors [personally], (Since they lived very long lives, spanning many generations.) would give names [to their children] on the basis of events [of their lives], but we, who do not know our ancestors, (Because they are already dead when our children are born.) give names [to our children] after our ancestors. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: The ancients, because they utilized the divine spirit [of prophecy], would give names on the basis of events, but we, who do not utilize the divine spirit, give names after our ancestors. Rabbi Yosei ben Ḥalafta said: Ever was a great prophet, as he named [his son] on the basis of [future] events. That is what is written: “Two sons were born to Ever… [the name of the one was Peleg, as in his days the world was divided [niflega]].” (Ever named his son after the dispersion of the Tower of Babel, an event that would happen later in his life.) Why was he named Yoktan? It is because he minimized [maktin] himself (He acted humbly.) and his affairs. What did he merit? He merited to produce thirteen families. If for the younger son who minimized his affairs it is so, for an older one who minimizes his affairs, all the more so. (If even the younger son is rewarded for acting humbly, all the more so if an older son does so.) Similarly, “Israel extended his right hand, and laid it upon the head of Ephraim, who was the younger [hatza’ir]” (Genesis 48:14) – Rabbi Huna said: From the report of their births, (In Genesis 41:51–52.) do we not know that he [Ephraim] was the younger? The explanation [for repeating the information here] is that he used to downplay [matz’ir] his affairs. What did he merit? He merited the birthright. If the younger one who downplayed his affairs merited the birthright, an older one who downplays his affairs, all the more so.

“And the stars” (Genesis 1:16) – Rav Aḥa said: This is analogous to a king who had two stewards, one ruled [only] over the city and one ruled over the [rest of the] province. The king said: ‘Since this one diminished himself [and consented] to be ruler over the city, I decree concerning him that whenever he goes out, a large crowd should go out with him, and when he enters, the city council and the multitudes should enter with him.’ So, the Holy One blessed be He said: ‘Since the moon diminished itself to rule at night, I decree concerning it that when it goes out, the stars should go out with it, and when it goes in, (When it sets.) the stars should go in with it.’ Similarly, “the name of his brother was Yoktan” (Genesis 10:25) – Rabbi Aḥa said: Why was he named Yoktan? It is because he would minimize [maktin] his affairs. (He was humble.) What did he merit? He merited producing thirteen great families. (See Genesis 10:26–29.) Now, if Yoktan (Who was the younger brother (Genesis 10:25).) received this because he minimized his affairs, if an important man minimizes his affairs, all the more so. Similarly, “Israel extended his right hand, and laid it on the head of Ephraim, who was the younger” (Genesis 48:14) – Rabbi Ḥonya said: Do we not know from the accounts of the births that he was the younger? What, then, is “who was the younger [tza’ir]”? It is because he would minimize [matzir] his affairs. What did he merit? He merited the birthright. Now, if the young one merited the birthright because he minimized his affairs, an older person who minimizes his affairs, all the more so. This is astounding. (It is astounding how great the power of humility is.)

R. Yonathan says (Devarim 6:8-9) "and you shall tie them … and you shall write them": Just as the writing (of the mezuzah) is with the right hand, so, the tying of the tefillin (on the left hand). Abba Yossi says: We find the right to be called "hand," and even though there is no proof (for its application here), it is intimated in (Genesis 48:17) "that his father placed his right hand." And what is the intent of "upon your hand"? To include an amputee (of the left hand), that his tefillin are placed on his right arm.

R. Samuel the son of Nahman stated: The Holy Spirit forsook Jacob twice. Once when he wished to bless Manasseh and Ephraim, and again when he was about to reveal the time of redemption. And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it upon Ephraim’s head (Gen. 48:14). He began to bless him with the words: And let them increase like fish (ibid., v. 16). He thus indicated that Ephraim’s descendants would be caught like fishes, as it is said: Say now “Shibboleth”; and he said “Sibboleth” (Judg. 12:6). (Just as fishes are caught by their mouths, so too forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed because they could not pronounce the word Shibboleth correctly.) When Joseph saw that his father was laying his right hand on the head of Ephraim, it displeased him and He held up his father’s hand, to remove it (Gen. 48:17). Jacob rebuked him, saying: “Do you seek to turn away the hand that vanquished the foremost among the angels?” R. Yohanan said: Jacob’s arms were like two columns in the public baths in Tiberias. And Joseph said unto his father: “Not so, my father, only this one is the firstborn” (ibid. , v. 18). And his father refused and said: “I know it, my son; I know it” (ibid., v. 19). He foresaw that Gideon would descend from Manasseh, but that his younger brother was the more important one, since Joshua would descend from him. And he blessed them that day, saying: “By thee shall Israel bless, saying: God make thee as Ephraim and Manasseh” (ibid., v. 20). He mentioned Ephraim before he mentioned Manasseh. When was his blessing finally fulfilled? At the time of the consecration of the chiefs. Then Ephraim brought his offering on the seventh day, and Manasseh on the eighth, in fulfillment of the scriptural verse: That confirmeth the word of his servant and performeth the counsel of his messengers (Isa. 44:26).

... [What about all] the praise of Joseph, who exceeded in the honor of his father? And yet he did not enter into him all the time, such that were it not that they came to tell him, "Your father is sick," he would not have known! Rather this is to inform you of his righteousness. For he did not want to be alone with his father, lest he say to him, "How did your brothers act with you?" And [then] he would curse them.... Hence he did not go to his father all the time.)

דרך ארץ פלשתים כי קרוב הוא, “the route which runs through the land of the Philistines; although (or because), it was the shortest route.” According to our author what is meant is “although,” despite, the fact that it was the shortest route. We find a similar meaning for the word כי in Exodus 19,5: כי לי כל הארץ, “although the whole earth belongs to Me.” Another example of this meaning of the word כי is found in Psalms 41,5, “heal me although I have sinned against You.” רפאה נפשי כי חטאתי לך. Consider also Genesis 48,14: שכל ידיו כי מנשה הבכור, “he crossed his hands although Menashe was the firstborn.” In our context, although there was an additional boundary to be crossed between Egypt and the land of Canaan, namely the land of the Philistines, as we know from when while in the land of the Philistines G-d had commanded Yitzchok not to continue on to Egypt on account of the famine in the land of Canaan, (Genesis 26,1) so that it seemed strange that G-d did not lead the Israelites by this route, He was afraid that if they would find resistance to their traversing that land, they would refer to return to Egypt.

סגולה מכל העמים, “more treasured than all the other nations.” Seeing that the entire earth belongs to Me, I am able to raise your stature above that of all the other nations. The word כי in this verse is to be understood as meaning: in spite of, just as it means this in Genesis 48,14: כי מנשה הבכור, “although Menashe is the firstborn,” or the word כי in Exodus 13,17, כי_קרוב הוא, “although it is near.”

כי לא ישא לפשעכם כי שמי בקרבו, “for he has no authority to forgive your deliberate sins, as My Name is within him.” G-d means that even though he (that angel) is a celestial creature, and therefore Divine, He cannot “forgive” any trespass against Him. Another place in the Bible where we encounter a similar thought is Psalms 25,11, למען שמך וסלחת לעוני כי רב הוא, “as befits Your name, o Lord, pardon my iniquity.” Other examples of “irregularities” in treatment, are Genesis 48,14, where Yaakov insisted in giving preferential treatment to Ephrayim although Menashe was the firstborn. Another example is found in Psalms 74,20-21: הבט לברית כי מלאו מחשכי ארץ נאום חמס וגו', “Look to the covenant, for the dark places of the land are full of the haunts of lawlessness. Let not the downtrodden turn away disappointed, let the poor and needy praise Your name.” [Here the people ask to be promoted instead of being demoted. Ed.]

כי ירט הדרך לנגדי, “because your way is contrary to me.” The word כי is used here in the sense of “although,” just as in Genesis 48,14: “כי נמשה הבכור, “although Menashe is the firstborn.” The same meaning for the word כי is true inPsalms 41,5: כי חטאתי לך, which correctly translated means: “although I have sinned against You.” It would not make sense to translate this as “for I have sinned against you,” although most translated editions of Psalms translate it this way. One does not ask for mercy because one has sinned, but in spite of having sinned. The angel explains to Bileam that although the latter had undertaken a mission against G-d’s will, G-d gives him this opportunity to desist from his evil intent and the resulting punishment. [This is also why the angel is associated with G-d’s attribute of Mercy, Hashem, instead of with His attribute of Justice, i.e. elokim. Ed.]

וסמכו בני ישראל את ידיהם על הלוים, we find this kind of procedure also in Numbers 27,18, where G-d tells Moses to appoint Joshua as his successor, i.e. וסמכת ידך עליו, “you are to place your hand upon him.” Whenever this procedure is mentioned in the Bible it means that authority is being transferred by the person placing his hand or hands on the person to be appointed. The first person to do so was Yaakov in Genesis 48,14, where he placed his right had on Joseph’s younger son Ephrayim, indicating that he should be treated as his firstborn.

וישא אהרן את ידיו אל העם ויברכם, “Aaron raised his hands in the direction of the people and he blessed them.” The meaning of the words אל העם, normally translated as “in the direction of the people,” should here be translated as: “for the sake of the people, i.e. to meet their needs.” The commentators who disagree with us and dress themselves up in fancy garments to lend weight to their words, are wrong when they said that the meaning of these words is that Aaron lifted his hand in order to indicate to the people that they should raise their right hand as affirmation. These commentators [Christian theologians, compare St. James version of the Bible, Ed.] quote a Midrash (see gloss of Maimoniot on Maimonides Hilchot Tefillah 14,3) that the word ידו with the vowels of the plural, is spelled without the letter י indicating that it is really a singular, i.e. “his hand.” Our answer to them is simply that traditionally we read the word as if it had been spelled with the letter י, i.e. that Aaron raised both his hands. Their argument that Aaron only raised his right hand is null and void. The reason that we encounter this unusual spelling is to indicate that the right hand is more important than the left hand concerning mystical matters which are revealed only to select individuals. This is why the Kabbalists have said that the word is spelled ידו in the singular to allude to the select individuals who are recipients of deeper insights from the “right” side of G’d. In this way justice is done both to the spelling and the traditional reading. When you compare the prayer Moses uttered when he prayed for the victory of the Israelites against the attack by Amalek in Exodus 17,11 you will also find this dual spelling of the word ידו, i.e. והיה כאשר ירים משה ידו וגבר ישראל. “Whenever Moses raised his hand (s) Israel would prevail.” In the following two verses the word is spelled as ידיו in the normal way. Had Moses used only one hand at a time, it is hard to understand why he needed two men to support his hands as is evident from verses 12 and 13 in that chapter. If the people who understood our verse as Aaron raising his hands towards the people (instead of towards G’d) would be correct, the Torah should have written instead of וישא אהרן את ידיו אל העם, the formula וישלח אהרן את ידיו אל העם. It is the custom for a father who prepares to bless his son to put his hand on his head, just as Yaakov did when he prepared to bless the two sons of Joseph. In that instance the Torah wrote וישלח ישראל את ימינו, “Israel extended his right hand.” In our verse the Torah employs the verb וישא to show that Aaron’s hands were stretched upwards (towards heaven). We have a parallel example in Kings I 8, 54-55 ויהי ככלות שלמה להתפלל אל ה' את כל התפלה והתחנה הזאת וכפיו פרושות השמים ויעמוד ויברך את כל קהל ישראל, “it was when Solomon had completed this entire prayer and entreaty with his palms outstretched heavenwards, he stood and blessed the entire congregation of Israel.” It is clear that the meaning of the verse is that Solomon’s hands were in an upright position aimed towards heaven.

As he blessed his grandsons, Jacob deliberately “[made] his hands wise” (Rashi, Genesis 48:14.) and graced Ephraim with the bull’s share of the blessing. (Genesis 49:22.) He must have seen the potential greatness of the lad, purposefully dimming his eyes to the convention of the firstborn receiving the more significant inheritance. (Genesis 48:10.)

Reish Lakish raised objections against him from twenty-four occasions where the Torah writes: His hands, for example: “His own hands [yadav] shall bring the offerings of the Lord” (Leviticus 7:30); “his hands [yadav] shall contend for him, and You shall be a help against his adversaries” (Deuteronomy 33:7); “Guiding his hands [yadav] wittingly, for Manasseh was the firstborn” (Genesis 48:14). Rabbi Elazar was silent, as he had no response.

Yisrael stretched out his right [hand] and placed it on the head of Ephraim, [although] he was the younger, and his left [hand] on the head of Menasheh. He deliberately placed his hands so, even though Menasheh was the firstborn.

He altered his hands.

And Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it upon the head of Ephraim, though he was the younger; and his left hand upon the head of Menasheh, altering his hands, for Menasheh was the firstborn.

Going back to the line: ‎את האלוקים התהלך נח‎, “Noach ‎walked with G’d;” the emphasis in this line is on the ‎attribute for G’d used, i.e. ‎אלוקים‎, the attribute of Justice. It was ‎beyond Noach’s kind of tzidkut, righteousness, to turn the ‎attribute of Justice into an attribute of Mercy through his ‎lifestyle. In this respect he was different from Avraham and ‎Yitzchok, concerning both of whom the Torah writes that they ‎‎“walked before G’d,” not merely “with G’d.” (Compare Genesis ‎‎17,1 and 48,15) In those verses the Torah wished to alert us to ‎the patriarchs’ ability to persuade G’d to substitute the attribute ‎of Mercy for the attribute of Justice, on occasion.

“… God before whom my fathers walked … who guided me all my life ….” (Bereshit, 48:15) Yaakov Avinu made himself small before his fathers, Avraham and Yitzchak. He said that their wisdom and understanding was so great that they could by themselves cause an expansion of God’s will. Even if God created a small opening for them, in their wisdom they would expand and extend it in order to do the will of their Creator, and would understand even what God had not explicitly illuminated to them. This is the meaning of “before whom my fathers walked,” meaning that they went by means of their own power. But as for me, “E-lohim who guided me all my life until this day,” meaning that for every action I do, no matter how small, I need God to illuminate His will into me. I even need it with this action (blessing Menashe and Efriam), where I saw how it is His will to change it (to bless the younger before the older), nevertheless I need to see even the second time how it is His blessed will. Truly in this matter Yaakov was the greatest of the Patriarchs, for to have God constantly lead one’s actions is a great level. This was the prayer of King David (Tehilim, 23:1), “God is my shepherd, I will lack nothing,” meaning that for me the Providence of God will not be lacking, He will always guide me, and I will be ever aware that God is guiding me. In His goodness He conducts everything, it is only man who turns his face away, not wanting to behold and pray. Yet at a time when a man prays a complete prayer he is answered immediately, and he will see that God is the Shepherd. This is the meaning of “I shall not lack,” meaning that he will not turn his face from Him.

ויברך את יוסף, “he blessed Joseph.” A blessing given to the sons is automatically also a blessing for their father. (Rash’bam)

ויברך את יוסף, He blessed Joseph. We do not find a blessing addressed to Joseph here. Nachmanides says that by blessing Joseph's sons Jacob actually blessed Joseph. This does not really appeal to me as it does not explain why Jacob did not say some words which would apply to Joseph individually. I believe that the very word ויברך was Jacob's way of telling Joseph that he would remain blessed henceforth.

The wording may also be explained in terms of Bereshit Rabbah 39,11 that Abraham received the keys to blessings. Isaac received those keys after Abraham had died and he handed them to Jacob before he sent the latter to get himself a wife. At this point Jacob bequeathed these keys to his son Joseph. This is the meaning of the words ויברך את יוסף.

ויאמר האלוקים אשר התהלכו אבותי לפניו, He said: "the G'd before Whom my forefathers walked, etc." Jacob recited the virtues of his forefathers before commencing his blessing much as we do when we commence the central prayer the עמידה, where we first introduce ourselves to G'd as descendants of worthy people. Jacob did not spell out the specific merits of his fathers, but when he spoke about himself he added that his own conduct had been similar to that of the sheep which walks in front of the shepherd who looks after it. Only after this introduction did Jacob commence his blessing with the words: המלאך הגואל.

ויברך את יוסף ויאמר, “He blessed Joseph, saying:” In commencing with Joseph’s blessing Yaakov blessed him only by conferring his blessing on Joseph’s sons. From what appears to be a simplistic point of view, i.e. a reading of the text without reading between the lines, the message of the Torah is that the true blessing a person can experience is that his sons (children) are being blessed. The vicarious aspect of the blessing is its most powerful aspect. (The Torah only had to write: “he blessed them,” instead of bothering to write ”He blessed Joseph and said; etc.”) A kabbalistic approach sees in this blessing an allusion to all ten emanations. The wordsאשר התהלכו אבותי לפניו ה-אלו-הים embody the attributes חסד וגבורה, the outstanding qualities of Avraham and Yitzchak seeing that it is such an unusual way of phrasing the blessing. We would have expected Yaakov to say ה-אלו-הים אשר הלכו לפניו אברהם ויצחק. The fact that Yaakov added the words אבותי are a reference to the names of the attributes of G’d which had been revealed to Yaakov. A few words later he adds: ה-אלו-הים הרועה אותי; the word רועה is derived from ריע, companion. Yaakov referred to the attribute of G’d which had become manifest to him throughout the vicissitudes of his trouble-filled life. His שלום וריעות, “peace and serenity,” had been achieved only by means of that attribute of G’d. Psalms 80,2 alludes to this when the psalmist says: רועה ישראל האזינה, נוהג כצאן יוסף, “Give ear, O shepherd of Israel who leads Joseph like a flock!” He concludes his blessing with the words המלאך הגואל ...בקרב הארץ, “the angel who redeems me...may they proliferate like the fish within the land.” The word בקרב, is analogous to כי שמי בקרבו, “for My name is present within him (Exodus 23,21).” Had Yaakov begun his prayer with the words המלאך הגואל, this would have sounded heretical, as if he had prayed to the angel. Seeing that he commenced his prayer with the words ה-אלו-הים, there cannot be a suspicion that he addressed the angel as the one who should fulfill his prayer. A careful analysis of the wording used by Yaakov in verses 15-17 will demonstrate that this blessing is essentially the same as the one he extended to Joseph in verses 22-26. In the latter blessing Yaakov spoke of מידי אביר יעקב, “from the hands of the mighty One of Yaakov,” as being the source which רעה אבן ישראל, “shepherded the stone of Yisrael.” The words ידי are a reference to the two hands supporting the throne of Solomon, the attributes גדולה and גבורה respectively; these attributes were earlier referred to by the words אברהם ויצחק; the expression אביר יעקב which refers to תפארת ישראל, the attribute which combines the attributes of Avraham and Yitzchak respectively, is called אביר יעקב, in verse 24. Proof that the Torah speaks of a unique attribute of Yaakov is the fact that you do not find the expression אביר אברהם or אביר יצחק anywhere in the Torah. In our prayers we call upon this attribute when we say עננו אביר יעקב “answer us O mighty One of Yaakov” in the Selichot during the days preceding Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. This attribute occurs only in connection with either יעקב or ישראל. In verse 24 it appears in both forms as אביר יעקב and as רועה אבן ישראל The overall meaning of verse 24 is that the source of Yaakov’s spiritual strength also known as תפארת ישראל is אבן ישראל, another name for כנסת ישראל, the “spiritual concept of the people of Israel.” There is therefore no reason to be surprised that the Torah (Yaakov) describes the blessing of Joseph’s sons as the blessing of Joseph. Blessing the “fruit,” i.e. the product, is the most effective way of blessing the tree, the source.

ויברך את יוסף, anyone blessing his sons, automatically was conferring a blessing on him also.

אשר התהלכו אבותי לפניו, I have already explained on Genesis 17,1 that this wording includes serving G’d in one’s heart as well as with deeds. The root of all religious service is in the heart. [when it is only the from the lips outward it is a sham. Ed.] We must not understand Yaakov as claiming credit for himself or boasting, that he himself had served G’d, although it is a fact that he had served the Lord; he meant to give credit to his fathers, suggesting that if G’d had been at his side this had been largely due to the merits of both his father and grandfather. המלאך, having first spoken about G’d having assisted him, and creating the impression that G’d, personally, had done so, he now mentions the intermediary always used by G’d to do His work. We know from Psalms 34,8 חונה מלאך ה' סביב ליראיו ויחלצם, “G’d’s angel camps around those who fear Him and He rescues them,” that His agents called מלאכים are close at hand whenever the righteous are in danger. This is why Yaakov at this time referred to המלאך הגואל אותי מכל רע, the one sent by G’d to rescue him, protect him, and bless him, יברך את הנערים will function similarly and protect Joseph’s sons. We know that such angels had been in evidence protecting Yaakov first from Lavan, then from Esau, and again when the Emorites launched an attack after Yaakov’s sons had killed the males of Shechem and looted the town.

AND HE BLESSED JOSEPH, AND SAID. The meaning of this verse (The verse begins by stating that Jacob blessed Joseph, and the blessing that follows refers only to his sons. Ramban is attempting to resolve this difficulty.) is that in order to bless Joseph, out of his love for him, he blessed his sons. Scripture is relating that Joseph had no other children and his entire blessing was inherent in the blessing of these boys. It may be that [the blessing here was directed at Joseph himself, stating that] the other children who will be born to him in the future (Verse 6 here.) shall be called by the name of their brothers and be blessed with their blessing. In my opinion this latter interpretation is correct since the prophet Jacob said, And the children that were born (‘holad’to’) (Holad’to is in the past tense and means “were born to you.” Ramban will explain that Jacob’s words are to be understood as if they were in the future tense: “And the children that will be born to you after them shall be thine.” Joseph thus had other children besides Ephraim and Menasheh, whom Scripture does not record, as they were counted among the tribes of his first sons.) after them, shall be thine, and his word would not be in vain. (As it would be if we interpret the verse literally as referring to the past for Joseph did not as yet have any children other than Ephraim and Menasheh.) However, Joseph did beget children after that, just as is the opinion of Onkelos, who translated: “And the children that you will beget after them.” And thus, asher holad’to is a past tense replacing a future, just as in the verse, Which I took out of the hand of the Amorite, (Verse 22 here. Here again, lakachti (I took) is to be understood as if it were in the future tense.) and many additional verses besides. Even in line with the literal interpretation of Scripture it would appear that Joseph had children that he had begotten after his father came to him in Egypt. This is obvious from the fact that Jacob found it necessary to elaborate rather than say, “And now thy sons, Ephraim and Menasheh, who were born to thee, shall be mine as Reuben and Simeon, and the children that will be born shall be thine.” This is the reason why Scripture states, And unto Joseph were born two sons before the year of famine came, (Above, 41:50.) since after the famine additional children were born to him, but Scripture does not mention them as there is no need for us to know of them [since they were absorbed into the tribes of Ephraim and Menasheh].

THE G-D, BEFORE WHOM MY FATHERS, ABRAHAM AND ISAAC, DID WALK, THE G-D WHO HATH BEEN MY SHEPHERD ALL MY LIFE LONG UNTO THIS DAY. The prophet (Jacob. Ramban is here explaining the double use of Elokim (G-d) in this blessing: The G-d before Whom … the G-d who hath been my shepherd.) calls upon the G-d of his fathers Who [has] the greatness and the power and Who did great and tremendous things for them, and [after that he refers to Him in a synonymous way and] he calls upon the true G-d, Who had been his shepherd all his life. It is possible that the word haro’eh (shepherd) — in the phrase, Who hath been my shepherd — is derived from the word rei’ah (friend), as in the verse, Thine own friend (‘rei’acha’), and thy father’s friend, forsake not, (Proverbs 27:10.) for in that attribute there is peace and friendship. Do not find difficulty with the expression, all my life unto this day, in connection with that which we have written on the verse, And he offered sacrifices unto the G-d of his father Isaac, (Above, 46:1. The difficulty is that the verse here indicates that the attribute of peace was forever directing Jacob’s life, while in the verse above (46:1) Ramban explained that this attribute did not come into his life until that time. (Tziyoni. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 263.)) for from his very inception He did indeed lead him in the true path, but His attribute of truth was not brought to bear upon him completely until he returned to the land of his ancestors as he was outside of the Land, and also because he was constrained to conduct himself in a crafty manner towards Laban, and that was not the path of truth.

ויברך את יוסף, blessings bestowed on one’s children are a blessing bestowed on the father.

Er segnete Josef, indem er dessen Kinder segnete. Ist ja des Vaters höchster Segen der Segen, der seinen Kindern wird. — התהלך kommt nur von Gott und Menschen vor und bezeichnet ein Sich-selbst-führen, somit einen Wandel aus freier sittlicher Energie, oder bildlich von Elementen, die im Dienste Gottes als Boten wandeln, so von Blitzen. Er spricht diesen sittlich freien Wandel vor Gott bescheiden nur von seinen Eltern aus. Aber auch er hatte Gott kennen gelernt, Er war ihm der Hirte, der ihn geleitet und geführt, geweidet und erhalten von dem Anfang seines Daseins bis auf diesen Tag.

He blessed Yoseif. Scripture does not relate the contents of this blessing.

And said. After he blessed Yoseif.

The God. You, O Elokim before whom my fathers walked, do this in their merit

האלוקים הרועה אותי, the same G’d Who has acted as my own shepherd, i.e. “You Who have shown me so much love.”

He, Jacob, blessed Joseph and said: The God before whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked, the God who shepherds, directs, me from my beginnings until this day. Although the blessing was bestowed upon Joseph’s children, a blessing given to children is also automatically a blessing for their father as well. 7

ויברך את יוסף, “He blessed Joseph.” Although, literally speaking, as we can see, he blessed Joseph’s sons, when the sons are blessed this is a great blessing for their father. Seeing that Joseph had only these two sons, Yaakov invested all his blessings in these two sons, thereby blessing all of Joseph. Even if Joseph were to have more children in the future, their blessings would be derived through the blessing now given to Ephrayim and Menashe.

When G'd created the universe, He created three levels of creatures. A) The totally abstract intelligent beings form the highest layer. B) All the bodies in outer space form the middle layer. C) The lowest layer of creatures, i.e. everything here on earth. All three layers of creations share certain basic phenomena. 1) They exist. 2) They endure. 3) They possess a degree of perfection. Naturally, the closer the creation is to its original Creator, the greater the measure of the aforementioned attributes such creations possess. We on earth on the other hand, having been fashioned out of dust, enjoy very little in the way of an enduring existence, our only claim to eternity being our continuity as a species. The degree of perfection that we do enjoy is also limited, due to the imperfect nature of the materials used in fashioning us. In spite of the best efforts of the finest craftsmen to improve, beautify and enhance whatever there is on this earth, their efforts only achieve an improvement in the external appearance vis a vis its natural state. Our basic position in the universe is not improved vis a vis the planets or the disembodied spirits. Any discussion of closeness to or distance from the Creator, can be meaningful only if one remains aware that our position in the universe will remain that of being the most remote from the Creator. Man, alone of all the creatures in the universe is found in two spheres. Physically, we undoubtedly belong to the third realm, whereas spiritually, we belong to the first realm. Man alone, thanks to being in possession of a free will, is able to anchor himself more and more firmly in the first realm, in direct ratio to his efforts to gain deeper insights. As a result, he will also improve his character, personality, and become closer to the inhabitants of the first realm. All this is possible in spite of the fact that man was last in the order of creation, and therefore furthest removed from the Essence of the Creator. "He blew a soul into man." (Genesis 2,7) By this act, the Creator established as close a relationship with man as exists between the creatures of the first realm and Himself. In this manner man became equal to both the first and the third realm of creation, simultaneously. Man alone, of all that has been created, is therefore motivated to escape death and oblivion, to seek the source of eternal life and cling to it with all his might. At least that is the path taken by man when he lives according to the wishes of his Creator. We find the expression halach, he walked, used in connection with most outstanding people, since their lives represented constant progress, movement towards a goal, an objective. "Enoch walked with the Lord." (Genesis 5,22) When one feels distant, one tries to come closer. Finally, when one has reached one's goal of closeness to G'd, we read "for the Lord took him." (ibid) Noach was a similarly motivated person. "Noach walked with G'd ." (Genesis 6,9) Of the ancestors, collectively, the Torah testifies "your forefathers walked in front of Me." (Genesis 48,15) Abraham is commanded by G'd: "walk in front of Me and become perfect," (Genesis 17,1) after he had already practiced walking for many years. Clearly, all this "walking" had been inspired by original man's (Adam) failure to move forward. In fact, when Adam heard the voice of the Lord "walking" in the garden, he "hid himself;" he did not even try to keep in step with G'd. (Genesis 3,8) When the Torah reports Amram marrying Yochebed, this is described by the words "a man from the house of Levi walked and married a daughter of Levi." (Exodus 2,1) The choice of the expression "walked" could symbolise that this act was a great movement forward in terms of the condition of the Jewish people at that time. Even Yitro appreciated the meaning of Torah when he said to Moses "you will inform them of the way they should walk." (Exodus The Torah asks us innumerable times to follow the footsteps of G'd, or to "walk" in its ways. (Torah) The prophet Elijah perhaps illustrates this quest of constant movement towards G'd, best. We always encounter him as being on the move, until finally, G'd takes him unto Him. Unfortunately, not many people appreciate their mission, and act in a way that facilitates such movement towards G'd. Even some people who have set out on the right way, get sidetracked. This is the meaning of the verse "the ways of the Lord are straight; the just walk along them, whereas the sinners will be tripped up by them." (Hoseah 14,10) There are obstacles on the path toward achieving closeness with G'd that only the righteous can overcome. (The author proves these points by more quotations)

Loss of the land of Israel to the Jewish people, is comparable to loss of the garden of Eden to mankind. Loss of Eden at the time was the introduction to the need of mortality. The Jewish people had conquered this mortality at Mount Sinai when they proclaimed the na-asseh venishma, the unqualified acceptance of G'ds law in its entirety. At that time, the domain of the angel of death was restricted, the Jewish people no longer being under his authority. The sin of the spies resulted in the angel of death regaining his authority over the Jewish people. (Bamidbar Rabbah 37) Life in the land of Israel is of a quality similar to what life in the garden of Eden had been. Midrash Eycha 1, states that whenever Israel is carrying out the Lord's will, it enhances His power. Whenever Israel fails to act in accordance with G'ds will, it causes His power to be diminished. The concept is based on the respective verses (Deut. 32,18) "The rock that begat you, you have weakened," as well as Numbers 14,17, "and now I pray let the power of G'd become great, as You have said for it to be proclaimed." The "weakness" of G'ds power referred to, does not stem from objective causes, but from a self imposed discipline that G'd has assumed. This fact, unknown to the gentiles, on occasion prevents G'd from displaying His power. When the Jewish people sin, and thereby forfeit G'ds promises or direct guidance, this may be perceived by the gentiles as a weakening of G'ds power. Similarly, when the Jewish people do perform the mitzvot, thereby qualifying for the reward promised them by G'd, the nations of the world who observe the good fortune of G'ds chosen people, will be impressed with His power correspondingly. When Moses prayed to G'd, pleading for the life of the nation, saying "now let Your power be great," he referred to this concept. Why, he asks, allow the nations to think that Your power has waned when they look at the misfortunes befalling the chosen nation? They will think that the denial of the land of Canaan to the Jews is simply proof of G'ds inability. They will not think that temporary causes have delayed the execution of G'ds avowed purpose. (as would be implied if we understood the word yecholet as a verb) Rather, they will be convinced that the task had proved somewhat beyond G'ds power. (using the word yecholet as a noun) Since, as we have seen, G'd Himself submits to the rules of laws He has created, to the point of allowing His freedom of action to be curtailed through the behaviour of others, we can understand the penalty of denying the land of Israel to the generation that accepted the majority report of the spies. The right to dispossess the Canaanites was embodied in the Jewish people’s superior moral conduct. Now the Jewish people had demonstrated that in spite of the revelation at Mount Sinai, and in spite of all the loving care lavished on the Jewish people ever since the Exodus, they had not risen to the challenge posed by the task of conquering the holy land. Now G'd had no legal means to expel the resident nation in favour of the Jews. The Jewish people belatedly declaring a readiness to risk their physical lives in order to achieve the conquest, had become meaningless. Once G'd had decreed that they would die in the desert, the only thing that they had left to lose was time. Therefore, they could not do the kind of teshuvah repentance that would demonstrate that their basic attitude had changed. Rabbi Joshua ben Levi in our opening Midrash summarizes the whole episode by showing the bride possessing three desirable qualities. Beauty represents visible attractiveness, an appeal to the senses, man's physical comfort. Wealth represents the useful. Nobility of ancestry represents the bride's superior moral qualities. Since all three qualities were combined in a single woman, union with a man becomes not only permissible but desirable, and an expression of G'ds purpose for man. Such a union would result in a life of discipline. A land blessed with similar attributes, would also enable the people on it to live a life of discipline. When the son insisted on looking over the bride, this was not because he did not trust his father who had,after all, always provided for him. It was because he did trust his father and because he knew him. The son looked for a way to avoid the moral commitment implied by this marriage. The father, though he realised his son's motives, was in a quandary all the same. Had he refused the son's request, he himself would have provided the fuel for the son's rebellion. The despatch of the spies needs to be seen in the same light. Regrettably, throughout the millenia, ever since the first Tishah be Av, we have still not learned to use the land of Israel and its bounty to help us discipline our lives and to assure ourselves of chayim shekullam aruchim, a life of infinite duration.

And this [specific] matter, it [emphatic] is the essence of the difference that was explained above between the name God-Elohi”m and the name God-YHV”H (blessed be He). For in the majority of cases, in the context of what the Patriarchs grasped, we found that the name used is God-Elohi”m: “O’ God-Elohi”m before whom my forefathers Avraham and Yitzkhak walked” (Bereshit 48:15); “the God-Elohi”m who shepherds me from my inception” (ibid). And so too we call Him (blessed be He) the “God-Elohi”m of Avraham…”, as I described previously in the context of the holiness of their level, that they gave no credence to any other power or context in the universe at all. However, their achievement of prophecy was not by nullifying the powers from their existence in toto. And what the verse stated (Shemot 6:3): “and I appeared to Avraham… as God-Ei”l Shadda”i” (whose context is also the same as the context of the name G-d-Elohi”m), intends to convey that I am the Master of All Powers, and if I so will it, each instant, I change the system of nature and the powers from how I fixed them at the time of creation—this is “God-Ei”l Shadda”i”. But in the aspect of the context of “My name God-YHV”H,” (whose context was described previously in chapter 11), “I did not make myself known to them” to be within their prophetic grasp.

[2] Another explanation: "I will make my opinions widely known." This is Jacob, when he went down to Egypt, he declared the power of the Almighty, as it is written "And he blessed Joseph and said, 'The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God who has been my shepherd all my life to this day'" (Genesis 48:15). He said to them, "May it be the will [of God] that you go in the ways of Abraham and Isaac." They gathered and listened (Genesis 49:1). And why did he call them? Rather he said, "Abraham, my grandfather, had two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. Ishmael was wicked, Isaac was righteous. Similarly, Isaac had two sons, Esau and I. Esau despised the ways of God, and I loved His ways. And God gave me twelve sons. You may say that half of them are righteous and half are wicked." They said to him, "We know what is in your heart." He immediately prostrated himself, as it is written "And Israel bowed in worship" (Genesis 47:31), and began saying "Blessed be the Name of His glorious kingdom forever and ever." Rabbi Chanina said, "Why did he prostrate himself? So that no impure matter should leave his body. At that moment, it was fulfilled 'God has made Himself known in Judah, His name is great in Israel;'" (Psalm 76:2).

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:49). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]….” – this is the offering that he presented in the name of Jacob, who had him precede Manasseh, and in the name of Joseph, who, because of his love, Jacob blessed him all those blessings, just as it says: “He blessed Joseph and said: The God [before whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked…]” (Genesis 48:15), and it says: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh…” (Genesis 48:20). “Dish [kaarat]” – this is Jacob; do not read it as kaarat, but rather, as akeret, who uprooted [akar] the right hand from Manasseh in favor of Ephraim. “Silver” – after, “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20); what he said to Joseph: “His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know; he too shall become a people…” (Genesis 48:19). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – corresponding to the one hundred and thirty words that there are from “he laid it on Ephraim’s head” (Genesis 48:14) until “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – this is Joseph, who was cast away [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “One” – as he was king in Egypt, just as it says: “One of the people (Avimelekh said this referring to himself.) almost lay [with your wife]” (Genesis 26:10). Likewise it says: “Joseph was the ruler over the land…” (Genesis 42:6). “Silver” – after “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver,” as due to his wisdom he was privileged to achieve kingship, just as it says: “After God has disclosed all this to you.… You will be in charge of my house…” (Genesis 41:39–40). “Seventy shekels in the sacred shekel” – as Gabriel came and added one letter from the name of the Holy One blessed be He to his name and taught him seventy languages, as it is stated: “He established it as a precept for Joseph [bihosef] (He added a heh, changing Joseph [Yosef] to Yehosef.) when he went out over Egypt; I learned a language I had not known” (Psalms 81:6), as were it not so, the Egyptians would not have accepted Joseph to rule over them. “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” – Jacob and Joseph were both full-fledged righteous men, and the two of them resembled one another. This accords with what Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph” (Genesis 37:2). It should have said nothing other than: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Reuben.” Why is it stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”? It is to teach you that Joseph resembled his father in every respect. Just as Jacob was born circumcised, so too, Joseph was born circumcised. Just as this one, his mother was barren, so too, that one, his mother was barren. Just as this one, his mother suffered from the pain of her pregnancy, so too that one, his mother suffered during birth. Just as this one, his mother bore two, so too that one, his mother bore two. Just as this one, his brother seeks to kill him, this one, too, his brothers seek to kill him. This one, his brother hates [soneh] him, and that one, likewise. This one is a shepherd and that one is a shepherd. This one is hated [nistam] and that one is hated. (See Genesis 27:41, 49:23.) This one was stolen from twice: “Stolen in the day and stolen at night” (Genesis 31:39); that one, there is a double expression of stealing: “For I was abducted [gunov gunavti] [from the land of the Hebrews]” (Genesis 40:15). This one was blessed with ten blessings, (See Genesis 27:28–29.) and that one was blessed with ten blessings. (See Deuteronomy 33:13–17.) This one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel, and that one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel. This one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel, and that one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel. This one begot children outside of the Land of Israel, and that one begot children outside of the Land of Israel. This one, angels accompanied him, and that one, angels accompanied him. (A midrash says that when Joseph went to his brothers at the behest of his father, three angels accompanied him.) This one ascended to greatness by means of a dream (See Genesis 28:10–16.) and that one ascended to greatness by means of a dream. This one, his father-in-law’s household was blessed on his account, and that one, his father-in-law’s (According to Bereshit Rabba 86:3, Joseph’s father-in-law Potifera was Potifar.) household was blessed on his account. This one descended to Egypt, and that one descended to Egypt. This one ended the famine and that one ended the famine. (See Bereshit Rabba 89:9.) This one administered an oath to his son, and that one administered an oath to his brothers. This one died in Egypt, and that one died in Egypt. This one was embalmed, and that one was embalmed. This one, his bones ascended, and that one, his bones ascended. Because Joseph resembled his father, that is why it is stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”; and that is why it is stated: “Both of them full…” – regarding Jacob and Joseph. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:50). “One…ladle [kaf]” – it corresponds to the palm of his right hand, which he placed on Ephraim’s head. Why does it call it “one”? It is because it is more significant than the left. “Gold…ten shekels” – it corresponds to the ten words that there are from: “Israel extended his right hand” (Genesis 48:14) until “and he was the younger” (Genesis 48:14). “Filled with incense” – Jacob saw this matter through the divine spirit, that Ephraim was worthy for him to place his right hand on his head. Likewise it says: “Guiding [sikel] his hands, as Manasseh was the first born” (Genesis 48:14). His hands were guided [hiskilu] by the divine spirit, just as it says: “Maskil of Eitan the Ezraḥite” (Psalms 89:1). (This is a psalm stated by Eitan the Ezraḥite with divine guidance.) “One young bull, one ram, one sheep in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:51). “One young [ben bakar] bull” – corresponding to Abraham, as it is stated: “Abraham ran to the cattle [habakar]” (Genesis 18:7). “One ram” – corresponding to Isaac, in whose regard it is written: “[Abraham…] took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son” (Genesis 22:13). “One sheep” – corresponding to Jacob, in whose regard it is written: “Jacob separated the sheep” (Genesis 30:40). Why did he sacrifice these three kinds of burnt offerings? It corresponds to the three patriarchs, corresponding to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “Let my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, be called upon them” (Genesis 48:16). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:52). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Elishama son of Amihud” (Numbers 7:53). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to Joseph, as it is written: “They slaughtered a goat” (Genesis 37:31). Why did he sacrifice this corresponding to Joseph? It is because when Jacob blessed them with the name of the three patriarchs, likewise, he blessed them with the name of Joseph and made them dependent upon him, as it is stated: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the two blessings that he blessed them: the former, “[may the angel…] bless the lads” (Genesis 48:16), and the latter, “by you Israel shall bless….” “Five rams, [five goats, five lambs]” – three species, corresponding to three generations that Joseph saw for Ephraim, who were attributed to Joseph, and they were patrilineal houses, as it is stated: “Joseph saw great-grandchildren from Ephraim” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise it says: “These are the sons of Ephraim by their families: Of Shutelaḥ.… And these are the sons of Shutelaḥ: Of Eran…” (Numbers 26:35–36). Ephraim, Shutelaḥ, Eran, these are three sons from three generations. Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five words (In the Hebrew phrase.) of “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20), as it is from there that Ephraim merited to present his offering first. “This was the offering…” – because he presented the offering in this order, the Holy One blessed be He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Elishama….”

“Noah walked with God.” Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya, Rabbi Yehuda said: This is analogous to a prince who had two sons, one older and one younger. He said to the younger, ‘Walk with me,’ and he said to the elder, ‘Come and walk before me.’ So too, of Abraham, whose strength was great, [God said,] “Walk before Me and be faultless” (Genesis 17:1). But Noah, whose strength was lesser, “Noah walked with God.” Rabbi Neḥemya said: This is analogous to a friend of the king who was sinking in thick mud. The king looked and saw him. He said to him: ‘Rather than sink in the mud, walk along with me.’ That is what is written: “Noah walked with God.” To what is Abraham comparable? To a friend of the king who saw (Through the window.) the king walking in dark alleys. His friend peered and began illuminating for him through the window. The king peered and saw him. He said to him: ‘Rather than illuminating for me through the window, come and illuminate before me.’ So too, the Holy One blessed be He said to Abraham: ‘Rather than illuminating for Me from Mesopotamia and its environs, come and illuminate before Me in the Land of Israel!’ That is what is written: “He blessed Joseph, and said: The God before whom my fathers, [Abraham and Isaac], walked…” (Genesis 48:15). Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish, Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is analogous to a shepherd who is standing and looking at his flock. Reish Lakish said: It is analogous to a prince who is walking with the elders going before him. According to the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, we are in need of His glory. According to the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, He is in need of our glory. (So that we will publicize His name throughout the world.)

“He blessed Joseph and said: The God before whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked, the God who has shepherded me from my beginnings until this day” (Genesis 48:15). “Fear the Lord, His holy ones” (Psalms 34:10) – Rabbi Azarya said: When Jacob our patriarch blessed Joseph, [Joseph] went out and his face was glowing. The tribes were saying: ‘Everyone associates with the one who is successful. Because he is king – one stands with the one who is successful.’ (They said that Jacob called Joseph to him and blessed him because he was showing special favor due to Joseph’s success and prestige. ) Jacob our patriarch said to them: “Fear the Lord, His holy ones [for there is no lack in those who fear Him].”

“He blessed Joseph and said” – Rabbi Berekhya said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish: Rabbi Yoḥanan said: [This is analogous] to a shepherd who was standing and looking at his flock. (When the verse states: “The God before whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked,” the image is of a flock that walks before a shepherd so that the shepherd can watch out for it. ) Reish Lakish said: [It is analogous] to a king walking, with the elders before him. According to the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, we need His glory. According to the opinion of Reish Lakish, He needs our glory. (The elders walk before the king as a sign of honor for the king. So too, the patriarchs walked before God in the sense that they spread knowledge of God in the world. )

"With God." Noah walked in the ways of his ancestors, as it is stated, "The God in whose ways my fathers walked." (Genesis 48:15) That they did not need help to be righteous ones, but Noah, "Noah walked with God", that if the Holy One had not held him, Noah would not have been able to stand.

It is written of Noah (in Gen. 6:9): NOAH WALKED WITH GOD. It is also written concerning the ancestors of the world (in Gen. 48:15): THE GOD BEFORE WHOM MY ANCESTORS < ABRAHAM AND ISAAC > WALKED. R. Johanan said: To what were the ancestors comparable < in their position > before the Holy One? To a shepherd who walks with his flock before him. Resh Laqish said: Up to now the flock has been necessary for the shepherd. Then to what were the ancestors comparable < in their position > before the Holy One? To a prince who walks with his elders before him. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 48:15): BEFORE WHOM MY ANCESTORS < ABRAHAM AND ISAAC > WALKED. Ergo (in Gen. 17:1): WALK BEFORE ME AND BE PERFECT.

[(Gen. 49:1:) THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS.] This text is related (to Job 12:20): HE DEPRIVES THE TRUSTWORTHY OF SPEECH AND TAKES AWAY THE REASON OF ELDERS. (Tanh., Gen. 12:8; Gen. R. 96, New Version, on Gen. 49:1 (= pp. 1276—1277 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); also Gen. R. 99 (another version):5 (= pp. 1200—1202 in the Theodor-Albeck edition).) This refers to Isaac and Jacob, in that both of them wanted to reveal a mysterion (The Greek word means “secret thing” or “mystery.”) of the Holy One (i.e., his secret). Isaac called for Esau. He wanted to reveal the end to him, but the Holy One concealed it from him, as stated (in Gen. 27:1): HE CALLED FOR HIS ELDER SON, ESAU; < AND HE SAID UNTO HIM: MY SON; AND HE SAID: HERE AM I >…. (Since both patriarchs used the same verb (CALLED) when death was near, the midrash assumes that the purpose for the calling is the same here as in Gen. 49:1. Isaac, however, got no further in his revelation than MY SON.) Jacob also wanted to reveal the end to his sons, (See above, 12:1; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 49:1.) as stated (in Gen. 49:1): < THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS AND SAID >: GATHER TOGETHER AND LET ME TELL YOU < WHAT SHALL HAPPEN TO YOU IN THE LATTER DAYS >. To what is the matter comparable? To a slave whom the king trusted with everything that he had. (PR 21:13.) When that slave came to die, he called for his sons in order to make them free and tell them where their manumission document (Gk.: diatheke (“testament”).) was. The king stood over him. When he saw him standing < there >, he discarded the thing which he had wanted to reveal to them. He began saying to them: Will you slaves of the king please honor him in the same way that I have honored him all my life? Similarly (according Gen. 49:1), Jacob called for his sons to inform them when the end would be. Immediately the Holy One was revealed over him. He said to him: You called for your sons but did not call for me. < It is so stated > (in Is. 43:22): BUT YOU HAVE NOT CALLED ME, O JACOB. When he saw the Holy One revealed over him, he immediately began saying to them: Will you please honor the Holy One just as my ancestors have honored him. It is so stated (in Gen. 48:15): THE GOD BEFORE WHOM MY ANCESTORS < ABRAHAM AND ISAAC > WALKED…. They said to him (the Shema' of Deut. 6:4): HEAR, O ISRAEL, THE LORD IS OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE. (Deut. R. 2:6; cf. Sifre to Deut. 6:4 (31).) Immediately (according to Gen. 47:31): ISRAEL BOWED DOWN UPON THE HEAD OF THE BED. He began to say in a whisper: Blessed be the name of his glorious kingdom forever and ever. (These words follow the first line of the Shema‘ in the liturgy before “And you shall love….” According to yBer. 5:8 (or 9) (14c) (bar.), the words were used after benedictions instead of Amen in the Temple. See also Pes. 56a, where R. Judah maintains that the words used to be omitted.) The Holy One said to him (in Prov. 35:2): IT IS THE GLORY OF GOD TO CONCEAL A MATTER.

Noah walked with God. The Holy One, blessed be He, supported Noah lest he sink to the level of the generation of the flood. For example, if a king’s son starts out on a journey as his father’s emissary, and is forced to travel upon a road thick with mud, the king supports him along the road lest he sink into the mire. However, with reference to Abraham, it is written: Walk before Me, etc. (Gen. 17:1), and concerning the patriarchs, it is said: The God before whom my fathers walked (ibid. 48:15). They preceded the Shekhinah, in order to fulfill His will.

Let Israel say, "It is not becoming for a person to say that he is good about himself, unless others testify to his goodness." And who testifies to the goodness of the Lord? Jacob said, "The kindness you have shown me is not for a day or a year, but for eternity," as it is written, "I am unworthy of all the kindness and faithfulness you have shown your servant" (Genesis 32:11). They asked him, "How many kindnesses has He done for you?" He replied, "They have no measure," as it is written, "God has shepherded me" (Genesis 48:15). Let Israel say, "What did I do to them in Egypt? And what did I pay them in the desert?" (Exodus 13:8) "And the Lord goes before them by day." (Exodus 13:21) "And what did they do to me at Sinai?" (Exodus 24:7) "All that the Lord has spoken, we will do and obey." At that moment, it was said, "I remember the kindness of your youth." (Jeremiah 2:2) Let Israel say, "Let the house of Aaron say, 'God is good, for His kindness is eternal.'" This can be compared to a homeowner who treated his workers well, but at the time of accounting, he did not scrutinize their work. At the time of threshing, he would serve them the best wine, but they did not know what was going on behind the scenes. Who knows his servants and his palace attendants? And who are the servants of the Lord? The sons of Aaron, who offer sacrifices to Him at all times.

Another thing, "The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want." This is what the verse says (Psalm 23:1). "The elderly will understand." Rabbi Yosei bar Hanina said that we can learn from the lowly shepherd who walks with his staff and bag all day, and David called God his shepherd. But David said, "The elderly will understand." Jacob called God his shepherd, as it says (Genesis 48:15), "The God who shepherds me." So I also call him my shepherd, as it says, "The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want." Another thing, the verse says (Deuteronomy 2:7), "For the Lord your God has blessed you in all the work of your hands." Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says that "has blessed you" means that even if you sit and study, you say "in all the work of your hands," and if you do it, you are blessed, and if not, you are not blessed. What does it mean (Proverbs 4:12), "Know the way you should go?" Your going should cause you pain in your livelihood. Rabbi Yehuda said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer that three things the road does: it wears out clothes, causes laughter lines on the body, and decreases going out. But the Holy One, blessed be He, did not do this to Israel, as it says (Deuteronomy 8:4), "Your clothes did not wear out from upon you." (Deuteronomy 2:7) "You lacked nothing." This is the decrease in going out. "The Lord your God is with you." Rabbi Yudan said, "In the merit of your saying, 'This is my God, and I will glorify Him,' I have given you forty years. Your clothes did not wear out. Rabbi Yehuda said, "If there is a king in the country, the country is not lacking anything." So (Deuteronomy 2:7) "The Lord your God is with you, and you lack nothing." "Not lacking anything, but rather just a statement, and it comes to be. If it is said that manna will be like meat or quail, it will become so. If it is said that oil will be like fish sauce, it will become so. If you ask for flour (Numbers 11:8), the people will turn and gather it. Konditon (a place) or crush it in a mortar. Ashishot (a place) and make it into cakes. Therefore it is said, 'nothing is lacking,' but whatever you speak with your mouth, that is what you will receive. 'I will rain bread from heaven for you' (Exodus 16:4). 'Water you desire' (Psalm 78:20). 'Strike the rock and water will flow' (Exodus 17:6). 'We want meat' they said, and when Moses heard this, he went to the Lord and said, 'Your children want meat.' The Lord said to him, 'Give it to them.' Moses said to him (Numbers 11:13), 'Where am I to get meat?' (Numbers 22) 'They will slaughter sheep and cattle for them.' If this is what you will do to me, then please kill me now. Moses said to the Lord, 'If you do not give them meat, they will kill me. And if I speak against them, they will kill me. Kill me now, I beg of you, if you will kill anyone.'" Immediately, the Lord became angry, as it is said (Psalms 106:32-33), "They provoked [Him] at the waters of Meribah, and it went ill with Moses because of them. For they embittered his spirit, and he spoke rashly with his lips." The Lord said to Moses, "Give meat to the children of Israel." Moses replied, "Where can I get meat?" The Lord said to him, "You had fish in Egypt, and you had cattle in Egypt, and you were so wealthy there, and now you have become poor." Moses replied, "It wasn't mine, it was theirs." The Lord said to him, "In Egypt, it was yours, and here it is not yours." (Numbers 11:23) The sages said, "He lacked nothing." They were not lacking anything, but they were considering it in their hearts, and it happened. Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said, "It can be compared to what Rabbi Berechia said in the name of Rabbi Abahu (Psalms 78:18), 'And they tested God in their hearts.' They were considering it in their hearts, and it happened." Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said, "They lacked only the words of prophecy. You should know that all those days when Israel rebelled, the divine voice did not speak with Moses, as it is said (Deuteronomy 2:16), 'And it was when all the men of war had perished.' What is written afterwards? (Deuteronomy 2:17) 'And the Lord spoke to me, saying.' Rabbi Yochanan said, "They lacked only repentance, as it is said (Hosea 14:2), 'Take words with you and return to the Lord.'" Rabbi ibn Ezra said, "They lacked only a certain thing. For all the forty years that Israel was in the wilderness, the angel of death was striking them with a death toll of fifteen thousand and change. And how much is one change? It is one out of four hundred and eighty-nine."

ויברך את יוסף ויאמר האלהים אשר התהלכו אבותי לפניו . The "walking before Him," mentioned here is an allusion to the spiritual awakening which proceeds in an "upward" motion and confers increased holiness on a person. I have explained this in my commentary on פרשת נח. Walking "before" G–d means to perform acts which in turn elevate a person spiritually. Walking "with" G–d means that G–d's input comes first.

Jacob made Joseph swear by his own "root," seeing Joseph symbolized the ברית, the covenant with G–d, as we have pointed out on numerous occasions. Placing his hand on his father's organ then was not symbolic of the covenant of circumcision, but of the ברית העליון, the covenant between G–d and man that ensures the continued existence of the universe. The word ירך in that context represented the seat of reproductive activity, the root of physical man, not merely its sanctification by circumcision. When Joseph made his brothers swear, he merely made them swear by his own מדה, attribute, not in his capacity as symbol of something higher. Since Joseph considered himself as an "extension," a pipeline of the domain of his father, he merely made sure that his bones would be moved from the ארץ התחתונה, the lowest level of earth (in this case Egypt), to the "lowest" level of היכל השם, Sanctuary, to the land of Israel. It is precisely because Joseph was that pipeline between the ארץ עליונה, the equivalent of earth in the Celestial Regions, that Jacob blessed Joseph's children by invoking their father. This is the meaning of ויברך את יוסף, "He blessed Joseph," before the line: המלאך הגואל אתי מכל רע הוא יברך את הנערים, "May the angel who blessed me bless the lads" (48,16). No רע, evil, stuck to our patriarch Jacob. Evil is the very reverse of maintaining the Holy Covenant as we know from: ויהי ער רע בעיני השם, "Er was evil (same letters reversed) in the eyes of the Lord" (38,7). Concerning people who are evil, it is written: לא יגורך רע, "Evil cannot abide with You" (Psalms 5,5), seeing Evil has no foothold in ארץ העליונה, the celestial equivalent to earth. That ארץ is known only as ארץ טובה, and טוב is the צדיק, the foundation of the universe as we know from: אמרו צדיק כי טוב הוא, "Say (about) the righteous he is good" (Isaiah 3,10). This is why the seed of Joseph, the keeper of the Covenant, was more sacred than any other, and as a result merited to be counted among the other founders of the tribes.

כי תועבת מצרים כל רעה צאן, “for the Egyptians despised people whose vocation was the rising and tending of sheep. The reason they did so was because they hated sheep meat, i.e. mutton, just as they hated goats’ meat. This was something not unique to the Egyptians. This is also why they could not sit at the same table as the Hebrews when the latter were being served lamb. They harboured a deep aversion for anyone stemming from the Euphrates-Tigris region. They considered the Sumerians as a lower class of human beings. (Exodus 8,9) The Hebrews claimed that they would insult the Egyptians if they slaughtered their animals as service to their G–d inside the boundaries of the land of Egypt. They would risk being stoned by them. It is interesting that they did not refer to being just killed, but they spelled out by which method they would be killed, a method which in Jewish law is the most severe kind of death penalty. Our author states that he has also heard a different interpretation of our verse. The Egyptians considered anyone slaughtering sheep or goats and eating their meat as guilty of the kind of perversion that would stamp such a person as a subhuman species. We find the word רועה, which we normally translate as “tending,” i.e. shepherding, also used by the Targum for “providing food” (transitive) on Genesis 48,15 by Yaakov in his blessings for his children when on his deathbed.

ויברך אלהים "And Elohim blessed" There are 3 different teachings about s’mikhai (Blessings) , And Elohim blessed Noaĥ(Gen 9:1). And on the other hand, "Elohim blessed Isaac. (Gen 48:15, Gen 25:11)" At the time when the world was created in the blessing of the Sabbath (Gen 2:3) and the world and in the days of Noah when all the first ones were lost and the world was renewed, it was necessary to bless a second time and blessed Isaac as it is in the Midrash until now I needed to bless my creation from now on the blessings will be entrusted to you.

If you will look closely at our verse (18,19) you will note that the Torah applies the feminine pronoun היא to the tasks performed by the priests, i.e. the ברית מלח, whereas in connection with the Levites (verse 23) the Torah employs the pronoun הוא, i.e. the masculine pronoun. What this proves is that the attributes are not totally separate from one another and that each attribute contains elements from the other. When something is defined as “feminine,” this does not mean that it is exclusively feminine, but that the feminine ingredients in that attribute dominate; the same applies to instances when we encounter the masculine attribute, i.e. the masculine aspect is the dominant one. We already explained repeatedly that the same concept applies to attributes such as “Justice” and “Mercy” respectively. In the instance quoted the word היא means that although we said previously that the dominating attribute associated with the priests is the attribute of Mercy, the Torah wants us to realize that this attribute is not exclusive; neither is the attribute of Justice which we described as predominant in connection with the Levites exclusive; hence the masculine pronoun הוא is here (23) associated with the Levites. [A construction such as found in verses 23, i.e. ועבד הלוי הוא את עבודת אהל מועד, is most unusual as the word הוא appears totally superfluous in the sentence. Ed.] We find similar examples of apparently inverted associations with the “wrong” attribute in connection with both Yaakov and David. The most famous example is Micah 7,20 תתן אמת ליעקב, as we would never have expected the harsh attribute אמת to be applied to Yaakov. Similarly, when David (Psalms 23,1) describes the attribute “Elohim” i.e. the attribute of Justice as being the one which looks after him as a protective shepherd, this seems at first glance similarly innocuous. The lesson from that wording is that the attribute of Justice contains elements of the attribute of Mercy. David uses the subject of פרנסה, livelihood, to demonstrate that both of these attributes are involved on their respective levels in ensuring man’s livelihood.

I have found some support for this theory in Bereshit Rabbah (Vilna edition under the heading שיטה חדשה לברכת יעקב),”on the first of Yaakov’s blessings.” The Midrash says that what occurred at this stage in Yaakov’s life may be compared to the following parable. A king had a trusted servant and was in the habit of leaving everything in that servant’s care. When the servant was about to die he called in his sons in order to make free men out of them, and to tell them where they could find the documents proving that they were free men. When the servant suddenly noted that the King was observing what he was about to do, he did an about-turn by asking his sons to serve the King all their lives just as he himself had served him all his life. Yaakov experienced something similar. First he wanted to reveal to his sons the end of their exile, when and how they would be redeemed. When he noted that G’d looked at the matter he was going to do with disfavour, he switched gears and exhorted his sons to remain loyal to G‘d throughout their lives just as he had been i.e. האלו-הים אשר התהלכו אבותי לפניו, “the Lord before Whom my fathers have walked.” G’d had expressed concern that whereas Yaakov had called upon his sons, he had not called upon Him. This is what the prophet (Isaiah 43,22) referred to when he said: “upon Me you did not call O Yaakov!” When Yaakov heard this he prostrated himself at the head of the bed and whispered “blessed be the name of His exalted Majesty forever more.”

התהלך לפני, as rendered by Onkelos, "serve Me" by carrying out what I command you ( in order to become perfect). This is also that meaning of the word התהלך in Genesis 24,40 as well as in Genesis 48,15. It is a reference to serving the lord in thought and deed. All service of the Lord is rooted in man's heart. This is why King Chiskiyah in Kings II 20,3 in his prayer says: אני ה' דבר נא את אשר התהלכתי לפניך באמת ובלבב שלם, "please o Lord remember how I have served you in truth and with a pure heart, etc." Chiskiyah first refers to his serving G'd with his heart, before mentioning that he had performed deeds which constituted service of the Lord also, when he said והטוב בעיניך עשיתי, "and I have done what is pleasing in Your eyes." At this juncture G'd commands Avram that He will require additional service from him, service to be performed on his own body. He had already proven that his heart was pure. He had also already perfected his personality traits to the extent that his mind and intelligence had suggested such improvements. This form of service to be performed on his body was something that his mind and reason would reject as illogical. G'd demanded this only in order for the people whom Avraham would produce would be recognizable by the circumcision of their body as unique, as wearing the mark of G'd. Even though many of the gentiles do circumcise themselves also, they do not do so in response to a command by G'd. Only the special seed of Avram, i.e. Yitzchok was included in this command. Also Yitzchok's special seed was included in that command, [i.e. according to our author Ishmael's children and Esau's children as well as the sons Avraham had by Keturah would not have been included in this commandment. Because of these considerations G'd commanded the circumcision before Yitzchok would be born or even conceived. Any convert, not alive at that time but joining the Jewish people and its faith are therefore described as being בני אברהם "descendants, sons of Avraham," [This is an additional meaning of the name change from Avram to Avraham, foretelling him that he would become the spiritual father of all future converts. Ed.]

ויתהלך, similar to Genesis 48,15 ויתהלכו אבותי לפניו, “before Whom my forefathers walked.” The wording means that Chanoch channeled all his love and desire into fulfilling the will of G’d, and he acquired a deep understanding of the ways of his Creator already at the age of 65. For the remaining 300 years of his life on earth he walked with G’d. In spite of this, he did not neglect his duties of producing offspring. As a result of his ever more profound study of theological matters he came to despise his body, so that when he no longer performed the commandment of being fruitful and multiplying, G’d decided that he had served his purpose on earth, and He removed him from the earth even though he had lived only less than half a normal lifespan. ואיננו כי לקח אותו אלוקים, the word ואיננו is meant to convey that he did not die from sickness, nor did he suffer pains before he died. His contemporaries had not considered his impending death as even a remote possibility, so that they were totally unprepared for it. They did not notice his absence until he had actually died. When the Torah employs the unusual phrase כי לקח אותו אלוקים, this is an allusion to the fact that G’d removed his soul to the heavenly regions. We have the same expression in Psalms 73,24 ואחר כבוד תקחני, “You took me toward honour.” Similar uses of the expression occur in Psalms 49,16 כי יקחני סלה, the thrust of the word לקח אלוקים being that instead of death leading to gehinnom, the party described as subject to G’d taking him, is transported by G’d immediately to his life in the hereafter. On the other hand, the expression cannot be explained in this fashion in Ezekiel 24,16 הנני לוקח את מחמד עיניך במגפה, “see I shall take from you the darling of your eyes, by the plague.” Even though the verse is introduced by the word הנני which always introduces something constructive, positive, and which might mislead the reader into thinking that what follows will be something good, something pleasant, the word במגפה, by the plague, makes it plain that being deprived of his wife is not presented by G’d as a positive experience for the prophet. It implies that not only will the prophet suffer mentally, but his wife will suffer physically. Also in Exodus 21,35 when the expression כי יגוף (same root) is used it is followed by the words ומת, that the party who has been gored will die as a result of such a goring. All this proves that מגפה is descriptive of a painful disease, or injury. On the other hand, it is a sudden affliction, whether in the form of a disease or assault by the horns of an ox. People who have led blameless lives do not experience death throes, but die without experiencing such painful afflictions. By contrast, the popular understanding of the departure from earth of both Chanoch and the prophet Elijah, is that G’d transferred them to their afterlife, Gan Eden, complete with their bodies. Though a widespread popular perception, it is shared by some of our sages (Derech Eretz zuttah 1,9 as well as a remark in Bereshit Rabbah 25) These people imagine both Chanoch and Elijah as leading the kind of idyllic life in Gan Eden that Adam had enjoyed briefly before he sinned. They are presumed to continue in this fashion until the arrival of the Messiah. We may be allowed to ask why in the story here in chapter 5, the Torah concludes the reference to each individual named with the concluding word: וימת, he died, whereas in chapter 10 when the generations after Noach are enumerated, the Torah does not even bother to mention that these people had died. One answer given is that seeing that the people mentioned here died during the deluge their death had to be mentioned, i.e. that they did not die of natural causes. [this cannot not be correct, as the deluge occurred in the year 1556 and several of the people mentioned in our chapter whose ages at death are given, died earlier than that, including Noach’s grandfather Metushelach, and Lemech, his father, who died during the lifetime of his father Metushelach. Ed.] I believe that the people mentioned in our chapter whose death is reported were righteous people; as a result their death left behind a spiritual void. Not a single one died a violent death during the deluge. This is why the Torah reports their death as a death from natural causes. Only their respective offspring died during the deluge. The people whose life (but not whose death) is recorded in chapter 10 were evil, so that their deaths did not leave behind a spiritual void at all, and their death did not warrant mentioning. Also, seeing that they did not live nearly as long as their antediluvian counterparts, there was nothing special about their dying when they did.

AND HE OFFERED SACRIFICES UNTO THE G-D OF HIS FATHER ISAAC. The duty of honoring one’s father is more imperative than that of honoring one’s grandfather. Therefore the sacrifices are associated with the name of Isaac, and not with that of Abraham. Thus the language of Rashi. But this is not sufficient, for it would have been proper for Scripture to say, “and he offered sacrifices unto the G-d of his fathers,” without singling out any one person, just as Jacob said, The G-d before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk; (Further 48:15.) and in his prayer he said, O G-d of my father Abraham, and G-d of my father Isaac. (Above, 32:10.) Or Scripture should have said, “and he offered sacrifices to the Eternal,” just as it says in the case of Abraham, And he built there an altar unto the Eternal. (Ibid., 12:7.) And what need was there to explain it further? However, this verse contains a secret, which the Rabbis revealed to us there in Bereshith Rabbah: (94:5.) When Jacob was about to go down to Egypt he saw that the exile was beginning for him and his children, and he feared it, and so he offered many sacrifices to the Fear of his father Isaac (Above, 31:53.) in order that Divine judgment should not be aimed against him. This he did in Beer-sheba which was a place of prayer for his father, and from there he had taken permission when he went to Haran. (See Ramban above, 28:17.) Now Scripture uses the word z’vachim, [a term connoting peace-offerings], to inform us that they were not burnt-offerings as were his fathers’, as Abraham offered burnt-offerings. Our Rabbis have said (Zebachim 116a.) that Noachides (See Note 148 in Seder Vayishlach, also Note 222 in Seder Bereshith.) did not offer peace-offerings; they offered burnt-offerings. And concerning Noah it is clearly written, And he offered burnt-offerings on the altar. (Above 8:20.) But on account of his fear of the Eternal, Jacob offered peace-offerings in order to bring all Divine attributes into accord towards him, even as the Rabbis have expounded: (Torath Kohanim Vayikra 16:1.) “They are called sh’lamim (peace-offerings) because they bring shalom (peace) into the world.” Now his original intent was directed at the Divine attribute of power, this being nearest to Isaac. This is the explanation of that which the Rabbis mentioned in Bereshith Rabbah, (94:5.) i.e., that the duty of honoring one’s father is more imperative than that of honoring one’s grandfather. This explanation applies to that which the Rabbis have said there in yet another form: “First you greet the pupil and afterward you greet the Rabbi.” (The case refers to a procession of a Rabbi and his pupils on the road. Since the pupils travel in advance of the Rabbi, a person coming from the opposite direction would first meet the pupils and then the Rabbi. Similarly, Isaac is the pupil and Abraham is the Rabbi. Hence Jacob offered sacrifices to the G-d of his father Isaac.) I have seen this text in the Midrash of Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakanah: (Sefer Habahir, 135. See Note 42 in Seder Bereshith.) “And Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac. (Above, 31:53.) Is there any one who swears by the belief of the Fear of his father? However, it was because Jacob was not yet given strength, and so he swore by the power given to his father, as it is said, And Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac. (Above, 31:53.) And what is this? It is this concerning which Scripture writes, Then the fire of the Eternal fell, and consumed the burnt-offering, (I Kings 18:38.) and it is further written, For the Eternal thy G-d is a devouring fire, etc.” (Deuteronomy 4:24.) Thus far the Midrash. From the words of the Rabbis of this Midrash, we learn that it was for this reason that it does not say here, “and he offered sacrifices to the Eternal,” [but instead it says, “to the G-d of his father Isaac],” because now in Beer-sheba Jacob had already become privileged to possess his own portion [and needed only to bring all Divine attributes into accord towards him], (The words in the brackets are from the Commentary of Lvush to the Rekanati on the Torah, who quotes these words of Ramban.) as it is said, Thou wilt give truth to Jacob, mercy to Abraham, as Thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old. (Micah 7:20.) It was therefore necessary to explain it now. Thus by the merit of the sacrifices, the G-d of his father Isaac appeared to him in the visions of the night (Verse 2 here.) with an ameliorated Divine attribute of justice. It is this which Scripture says concerning them, in the visions of the night, complementing that which He said, I am G-d, the G-d of thy father, (Verse 3 here.) for He is the G-d of Beth-el Who said to him in Haran, I am the G-d of Beth-el, where thou didst anoint a pillar; (Above, 31:13.) it is He Who is the G-d of thy father. This is the Name and this is the attribute. And He assured him that he should have no fear in Egypt for he will be found righteous in Divine judgment, and he will be redeemed after the affliction. This is the meaning of the Divine promise, And I will also surely bring thee up again. (Verse 4 here.) Now the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] has written in the twenty-seventh chapter of the first part of the Moreh Nebuchim (Guide of the Perplexed) concerning Onkelos’ translation of the verse, I will go down with thee into Egypt, and I will also surely bring thee up again, (Verse 4 here.) [which Onkelos rendered here literally]: “I will go down with thee…and I will bring thee up.” And the Rabbi was amazed at the opinion of Onkelos, [namely, that the literal translation should be used], saying that Onkelos had exerted all his effort to remove any implication of G-d’s corporeality from all narratives in the Torah. Accordingly, in the case of any expression found in the Torah implying any mode of motion that refers to G-d, Onkelos ascribed the action to a certain glory that had been created for the occasion, or a manifestation of Divine Providence. Thus he translated And G-d came down (Exodus 19:20.) as “and G-d manifested Himself;” I will go down now and see (Above, 18:21.) as “I will manifest Myself now and see.” And if so, why did Onkelos here translate literally, “I will go down”? And so the Rabbi explained that since Scripture said at the outset of the matter, And G-d spoke unto Israel in the visions of the night, (Verse 2 here.) thus indicating that it is an account of what Jacob was told and not what actually took place, Onkelos therefore did not hesitate to literally translate the words as they were addressed to Jacob in the visions of the night, for the words in question represent an account of what Jacob was told, not what actually took place. There is thus a great difference between a communication transmitted in a dream or a vision of the night, or a communication designated as having been made in a vision or manifestation, and a communication given clearly, [not in a dream, such as communications introduced by phrases like these]: “And the word of the Eternal came unto me, saying,” or “And the Eternal spoke unto me, saying.” These are the words of Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon. Similarly he said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 48.) that Onkelos never translated expressions of “hearing” literally [when the Scriptural references were to G-d], but instead explained them as expressing that a certain matter reached the Creator, or that He accepted a prayer. Thus Onkelos translated the Eternal heard (Above, 29:33.) as “it was heard before the Eternal;” he translated the verse, I will surely hear his crying (Exodus 22:22.) as “I will surely accept his complaint.” But if the matter is as the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] said, why does Onkelos shun literal translations of expressions of movement, and also avoid literal expressions of hearing due to his fear that they might indicate corporeality, but he does not in any place shy away from literally expressing “saying,” “speaking” or “calling,” whether the communication was in a dream or manifestation or overt speech, for in every case he translates: “and G-d said,” “G-d spoke,” “and G-d called unto Moses”? These expressions likewise signify corporeality, and Onkelos should have translated, “and it was said from before G-d,” or “and the glory of G-d said,” or “and G-d willed,” as is appropriate in each case, just as the Rabbi has explained (Moreh Nebuchim I, 65.) with reference to the terms “speaking” and “saying” when they refer to G-d. And why did Onkelos avoid literal translation in the case of “hearing” and did not do so with respect to “seeing,” which he translated as: “and the Eternal saw”? (Above, 6:5.) And that which the Rabbi has said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 48.) that “seeing” indicates mental perception as well as the sensation of sight, this applies all the more to “hearing” for it is employed in many places to indicate mental perception and will, such as: And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai; (Above 16:2.) Hear the voice of my supplications; (Psalms 28:2.) Yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear; (Isaiah 1:15.) And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the Eternal thy G-d. (Deuteronomy 28:1.) And so also, leiv shomei’ah (I Kings 3:9.) (literally: a hearing heart, an understanding heart), and so also in the case of most of [the verses cited by Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon]. So Onkelos should not have been apprehensive of expressions of “hearing” as they only indicate acceptance of a matter by G-d and His being pleased with it, for he does not avoid literal translations of expressions of sight any place, but translates it literally in all cases even when seeing alone is involved. However, where a matter is not conceived by sight alone, but requires attention and discernment, Onkelos renders it as befits the subject. For example, when Scripture says, Because the Eternal hath looked upon my affliction, (Above, 29:32.) [Onkelos rendered it as, “because my affliction is manifested before the Eternal”]. The verse, I have surely seen the affliction of My people, (Exodus 3:7.) [was rendered by Onkelos as, “the enslavement of my people is manifest before me,” and the verse], And G-d saw the children of Israel, (Ibid., 2:25.) [he rendered as, “and the enslavement of the children of Israel was manifest before G-d],” since His seeing them was not just as a matter of perceiving their bodies but of His attention to their situation and His knowledge thereof. This is Onkelos’ method throughout the Torah, and not as the Rabbi’s opinion would have it, as a consquence of which opinion he had to declare [our version of Targum Onkelos] erroneous (Ramban refers here to Chapter 48 of the first part of the Moreh Nebuchim mentioned above, in which Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam) sets forth the theory that Onkelos always renders “seeing” literally except where it is connected with wrong, injury or violence, in which cases he expresses it as “It was manifest before the Eternal.” Onkelos is thus consistent with the prophetic phrase, Thou canst not look on iniquity (Habakkuk 1:13). However, Rambam mentions that he found three passages which contradict his theory. One is the verse, And the Eternal saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, (above, 6:5), and the other two are mentioned in the following note. In these three cases which are connected with wrong and violence, Onkelos should have expressed “seeing” in the form of “being manifest before the Eternal,” and yet he translated them literally! Rambam then concludes that our version of Onkelos is inaccurate in those three cases! It is this conclusion of Rambam with which Ramban takes issue in the text before us.) in [the following three places: the verse mentioned above, namely, And the Eternal saw], (Above, 6:5.) and two other verses, (And G-d saw the earth, and behold it was corrupt, (above, 6:12). And the Eternal saw that Leah was hated, (above, 29:31).) which Onkelos translated as, “and He saw,” since these translations do not fit his theory. With reference to expressions of “passing” Onkelos paraphrased and thus translated the expression, And the Eternal passed by before him, (Exodus 34:6.) as, “and He caused His Presence to pass before his [Moses’] face.” He did this so that the passing object would be, in accordance with Onkelos’ opinion, something created, as he would not ascribe any expression of motion to the Creator in accordance with what the Rabbi has mentioned. (Moreh Nebuchim I, 21.) But if this is so, why did Onkelos literally translate the verse, The Eternal thy G-d, He will go over before thee? (Deuteronomy 31:3. In our version of Onkelos, the text reads, “His word will go over.” Ramban’s objection is thus removed.) This is a form of motion occurring in a narrative (As opposed to “the visions of the night.” See the beginning of the section where Ramban explains this distinction which Rambam makes.) and yet Onkelos was not apprehensive about it! Similarly, Onkelos translated the verse, And Israel saw the great hand, (Exodus 14:31.) as, “and Israel saw the power of the great hand.” He added the term “power” due to the subsequent expression, that the Eternal did, (Exodus 14:31.) yet he left intact the expression, “the great hand” and was not apprehensive and fearful of the term “hand” being ascribed to G-d and did not paraphrase it at all! He did the same in literally translating, written with the finger of G-d. (Ibid., 31:18.) The Rabbi’s answer (Moreh Nebuchim I, 66.) that Onkelos thought that “the finger” was a created instrument which, by the will of the Creator, engraved the writing on the tablets, is not the truth. There is the verse, At His right hand was a fiery law unto them, (Deuteronomy 33:2.) in translation of which Onkelos wrote, “His right hand,” and he was not apprehensive of “the right hand writing,” that is lest it indicate corporeality, and such is the case also with “the finger” as mentioned above. He furthermore literally translated: Thou stretchest forth Thy right hand (Exodus 15:12.) as, “Thou raisest Thy right hand.” So also the verses: Thy right hand, O Eternal, dasheth in pieces the enemy; (Ibid., Verse 6.) Thy strong hand; (Deuteronomy 3:24.) By a mighty hand, and by an outstretched arm; (Ibid., 4:34.) And My hand take hold on judgment; (Ibid., 32:41.) The eyes of the Eternal thy G-d are always upon it. (Ibid., 11:12.) [Onkelos literally translated all of these verses without fear that the terms “hand” and “eyes” might indicate corporeality.] Now in the case of Jacob, the Scriptural narrative begins, And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, etc., and yet Onkelos, fearing corporeality, translated [the verse, And, behold, the Eternal stood beside him], (Above, 28:12-13.) as “and, behold, the Glory of G-d stood beside him,” and he did not translate literally, “and, behold, the Eternal” although it was in a dream. (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon’s thesis is that the reason Onkelos did not paraphrase the verse, I will go down with thee into Egypt, but translated it literally, is that the narrative begins with a statement that it was in a vision of the night. Ramban questions this thesis, for in the story of the ladder, which is also introduced as a dream, Onkelos avoided possible indications of corporeality, and accordingly he paraphrased the verses.) He further translated the expression, And, behold, I am with thee, (Above, 28:15.) as “and, behold, My word will be in thy help,” and did not say literally, “and, behold, I am with thee,” just as he literally translated, “I will go down with thee,” even though the story of the ladder is a statement of what Jacob was told, [not a narrative of what took place], and is completely analogous to the narrative of the dream here. Again, Onkelos literally translated the expression, And I will be with thy mouth, (Exodus 4:12.) [even though the story there is not introduced as a vision of the night or a dream], and on the other hand he translated the verse, And He said, Certainly I will be with thee, and this shall be the token unto thee, (Ibid., 3:12.) as “behold, My word will be with thee.” Furthermore, Onkelos does not always translate literally in the case of dreams. Thus he rendered the verses, And G-d came to Abimelech in a dream of the night, (Above, 20:3.) And G-d came to Laban in a dream, (Ibid., 41:22.) as “and the word came from before G-d.” Should you say that Onkelos paraphrased it there because he was concerned lest one think that G-d came to them before the dream, and one might thus think that G-d’s appearance actually took place, [this would still not justify his using the expression, “and the word came,”] for in the case of Solomon it is written, In Gibeon the Eternal appeared to Solomon in a dream, (I Kings 3:5.) and yet Jonathan ben Uziel (See Note 152 in Seder Noach.) translated it as, “G-d revealed Himself to Solomon,” even though, according to Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, a narrative introduced as a dream is rendered by Onkelos and Jonathan as it was actually said. They find no difficulty in translating such a statement literally, even though the expression connotes corporeality, because since it occurs in a dream, they understand that it is inexact. Thus in the case of Solomon, since the Eternal appeared to him in a dream, it was proper for Jonathan to give a literal account of the occurrence, for since Scripture relates that it was in a dream by night, (I Kings 3:5.) one would himself infer that it was not real but only a dream in which the person dreaming imagined it to be so. [Now since Jonathan did not paraphrase the account of Solomon’s dream, although Onkelos did so in the case of the dreams of Abimelech and Laban, it thus helps to disprove the thesis of Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon that accounts of what occurred in man’s imagination are not paraphrased by the Targum.] Now do not think that Jonathan ben Uziel did this because the term “seeing” in reference to dreams is not found in Aramaic — for the verse, And I saw in my dream, (Above, 41:22.) is indeed translated [in Targum Onkelos] as “I saw,” and in the case of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, it likewise says in Aramaic, Thou O King, sawest. (Daniel 2:31.) And so did Onkelos translate the verse, Your murmurings are not against us, but against the Eternal, (Exodus 16:8.) as “but against the word of G-d.” Onkelos thus paraphrased here even though there is no fear or apprehension of corporeality connoted by literal translation. Likewise, he translated And the people spoke against G-d, and against Moses (Numbers 21:5.) as, “and the people murmured against the word of G-d.” So also the verses, Between Me and you, (Above, 9:12.) and Between G-d and every living creature, (Ibid., Verse 16.) were translated by Onkelos as: “between My word and you,” “between the word of G-d and every living creature.” There are many similar examples [of verses which he paraphrased in spite of the fact that there would have been no apprehension of intimating corporeality had he translated literally]. And so also he translated The Eternal watch (Ibid., 31:49.) as “the word of G-d watch;” G-d is witness (Ibid., Verse 50.) as “the word of G-d is witness.” Yet there would be no apprehension of corporeality had those expressions been literally translated. Besides, what sense is conveyed here by the expression, “the word of G-d’ watch or witness”? Similarly the verse, Swear unto me here by G-d, (Ibid., 21:23.) is rendered by Onkelos as “swear unto me by the word of G-d,” although people who swear do not mention, “I swear by the word of G-d.” There are many other such cases in Onkelos, and their secret meaning is known to the learned students [of the mystic lore of the Torah]. Likewise, with respect to the term “standing” when applied to G-d, the Rabbi said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 28.) that Jonathan ben Uziel’s intent was to explain it as meaning “to endure permanently,” and therefore he translated the expression, And His feet shall stand, (Zechariah 14:4.) as “and He will appear in His might.” So also all expressions denoting contact and motion were rendered by him as “the might of G-d.” Yet Onkelos had no apprehension of the term “standing.” and he translated it literally: Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock. (Exodus 17:6.) And concerning that which the Rabbi has said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 27.) that all expressions denoting any mode of motion are rendered by Onkelos as the revelation of the Divine Presence, or the manifestation of a certain Glory that had been created for the occasion, now Onkelos avoids even literal translation of verses which mention “seeing” the Glory [of G-d, and would certainly oppose using it to denote expressions of motion]. Thus he translates the verse, And the glory of the Eternal appeared unto all the congregation, (Numbers 16:19.) as “and the glory of G-d was manifested,” just as he said in translation of the verse, And the Eternal came down, (Exodus 19:20.) “and the Eternal manifested Himself,” and did not translate it literally as “and the glory of the Eternal appeared.” He also likewise translates “seeing,” when referring to angels, as “and he manifested himself.” (Onkelos, ibid., 3:2.) Now if it is as the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] said (Moreh Nebuchim I, 27.) that in the case of angels, or manifestation of a certain glory that had been created for the occasion, Onkelos does not hesitate to literally translate expressions denoting corporeality, it would have been proper for him not to avoid expressions of literal “seeing” of angels by man, and should there translate it as “and he appeared,” just as he has literally rendered the verse, For I have seen ‘Elokim’ face to face, (Above, Verse 32.) as “for I have seen an angel of G-d.” Heaven forbid that the Divine Presence or the Glory created for the occasion be anything except the glorious Divine Name, blessed be He, as the Rabbi has expressed himself here (Moreh Nebuchim I, 27.) and in many chapters of his book. Thus Onkelos translated the expression, If Thy face go not, (Exodus 33:15.) as “if Thy Divine Presence go not among us.” Now, other than the glorious Divine Name, blessed be He, Moses did not want a special Glory created to go with him, since the Holy One, blessed be He, had already told him, Behold Mine angel shall go before thee, (Ibid., 32:34.) and Moses was not pleased with it. He instead wanted that G-d in His own glory should go with him. Also, after G-d heard his plea and told him, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken, (Ibid., 33:17.) Moses said, Let the Lord, I pray thee, go in the midst of us, (Ibid., 34:9.) and this Onkelos rendered as “let now G-d’s Divine Presence go among us.” (We thus see that even here, where it is clear from the context that the verse refers to G-d and not an angel, Onkelos does not hesitate to translate “going” literally.) He similarly translated the expression, Thou canst not see My face, (Ibid., 33:20.) “thou cannot see the face of My Divine Presence, for man shall not see Me.” [In translating the verse in the book of Ezekiel, Blessed be the glory of the Eternal from His place,] (Ezekiel 3:12.) Jonathan ben Uziel said, “Blessed be the glory of the Eternal from the region of His Divine abode.” Now if by this “Glory,” [which is mentioned in the book of Ezekiel] Scripture refers to the Creator in His true essence, analogous to the verse, Show me, I pray Thee, Thy glory, (Exodus 33:18.) which the Rabbi has indeed so interpreted, (Moreh Nebuchim I, 54 and 64.) then how did [Jonathan ben Uziel] in translating the verse mention “the region of His Divine abode” [when the terms “region,” “abode,” etc., indicate corporeality]? And if one would say that the verse in Ezekiel refers to a certain glory that had been created for the occasion, as is the opinion of the Rabbi with respect to the verse, And the glory of the Eternal filled the tabernacle, (Exodus 40:35. Moreh Nebuchim I, 64.) and other similar verses, then how did the angels direct their words, “Blessed, etc.,” towards it when he who blesses and prays to a glory created for an occasion is as he who worshipped idols? The teachings of our Rabbis also contain many texts which indicate that the name Shechinah (Divine Presence) is identical with G-d, blessed be He. But all these subjects, [some of which are rendered literally and some of which are paraphrased, are not influenced by a fear of using terms denoting corporeality but rather by secrets] of the Cabala (See Note 56 in Introduction to Sefer Bereshith.) known to Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uziel, and the secrets thereof are revealed to those who know the mystic lore of the Torah. Thus in the Revelation on Mount Sinai, wherever Elokim is mentioned in that section, Onkelos renders it as “the Glory” or “the Word of G-d,” but when Scripture mentions the Tetragrammaton he does not so render it. All this is done by Onkelos with extraordinary care and wisdom, and I will yet mention (See Ramban on Exodus 20:19.) this with the help of G-d, blessed be He. Now the reason that Onkelos literally translated the verse, And ‘Elokim’ spoke all these words, saying, (Ibid., 20:1.) [rather than render it, “and the Glory of G-d spoke,” as he usually does wherever Elokim is mentioned], is that it is said, Face to face the Eternal spoke (Deuteronomy 5:4.) unto your whole assembly. (Ibid., Verse 19.) The student learned [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand. However, the reason why Onkelos here literally translated, I will go down with thee to Egypt, [and did not paraphrase it as “My Glory will go down with thee],” is that he wanted to allude to that which the Rabbis have said: (Mechilta Shirah 3. See also Megillah 29a.) “When they were exiled to Egypt, the Divine Presence went with them, as it is said, I will go down with thee to Egypt. When they were exiled to Elam, the Divine Presence went down with them, as it is said, And I will set My throne in Elam.” (Jeremiah 49:38.) Thus both the verse which speaks of G-d “saying” [namely, And He said, I am G-d, the G-d of thy father, etc.], (Verse 3 here.) and [the verse which speaks of G-d] “going down,” [namely, I will go down with thee], are alike [for they both refer to the Creator in His true essence], as I have explained above, and therefore he could not, under any circumstances, have translated in any other way, as I have hinted. But there in the case of Jacob’s dream, Onkelos could not have literally translated, “and behold I am with thee,” [and was forced to paraphrase it as, “and My word will be in thy help],” (Above, 28:15.) because it is written there, And, behold, the Eternal stood beside him. (28:13. Since the Tetragrammaton (“the Eternal”) represents the attribute of mercy, had Onkelos literally translated Verse 15, “and, behold, I am with thee,” it would have indicated that this attribute would follow Jacob into exile since at the outset of this matter in Verse 13, Scripture uses the Tetragrammaton. Hence Onkelos translated Verse 15 as, ‘and My word will be in thy help,’ which is a reference to the attribute of judgment. (Bei’ur Ha’lvush to Rekanati on the Torah, who quotes the words of Ramban.)) The student learned [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand. And due to the fact that Onkelos found the meaning of this verse not to be in line with its plain meaning, he therefore spurned [literally translating the rest of the verse, and rendered it as referring to assistance], and thus he said, “My word will be in thy help,” instead of saying “My word will be with you,” as he said in the case of Moses. (Ibid., 3:12.) And may G-d show us wonders in His Torah.

Also, why does the text say that he offered sacrifices to the God of his father, Isaac, and not the God of his father, Abraham? Rashi’s interpretation doesn’t solve this problem. He writes that this teaches us that a person has a greater responsibility to honor his father than his grandfather. Yet the Ramban has already written that it would have been better write, “The God of his fathers,” as we find elsewhere, “He blessed Joseph and said, God before whom my fathers’ Abraham and Isaac did walk…” (Gen 48:15) He could have mentioned his father first and then the grandfather since Abraham was his primary relation and the father of his family. It was not right to ignore him! Yet Ramban seeks to answer this question according to rabbinic tradition and not the p’shat, (P’shat refers to the literal, historical or contextual meaning of the text. D’rash refers to the rabbinical and homiletical meaning of the text. Abarbanel tends to seek out the literal meaning of the text though we might not always agree with his understanding of “literal.” The Maggid tends to read the text homiletical, more concerned with its spiritual and ethical insights. For our tradition and for us we might say that “Both these and these are the words of the living God!”) as I do. You should also note that God answered Jacob, “I am the God of your father,” not “The God of your fathers.”

[177] Now those of whom we have been speaking pray to be fed with the word of God. But Jacob, looking even higher than the word, says that he is fed by God Himself. He speaks on this wise: “The God to Whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac were well-pleasing, the God Who feedeth me from my youth up unto this day, the Angel who delivereth me out of all my ills, bless these boys” (Gen. 48:15 f.). How beautiful is his tone and temper! He looks on God as feeding him, not His Word; but the Angel, who is the Word, as healer of ills.

[179] In offering this prayer Jacob passed a censure on Joseph the statesman, who had ventured to say “I will nourish thee there.” His words were, “Make haste and go up to my father and say to him ‘thus saith’ ” and so on, and then “come down to me and tarry not,” finishing with “and I will nourish thee there, for there shall be famine for five years” (Gen. 45:9, 11). So Jacob at once chides and instructs the man wise in his own conceit when he says: “You must know, fine Sir, that the foods which nourish the soul are various forms of knowledge, and that these are not bestowed by the word of bodily sense but by God. He who reared me from youth and early prime to full-grown manhood (cf. Gen. 48:15) will Himself satisfy my needs.”

[67] The Practiser testifies to what I say in the words, “God who nourishes me from youth, the Angel who delivers me out of all my evils” (Gen. 48:15 f.). He ascribes to God the more important good things, by which the soul is nourished, and the less important, which come about by escape from sins, to God’s minister. 

[41] And therefore the Practiser in his prayer will show us the same truth. “The God,” he says, “to whom my fathers were well pleasing,” and adds “before Him” (Gen. 48:15) to show us the difference in fact between being pleasing “to Him” and “before Him.” The latter embraces both kinds of well pleasing, the former is confined to one only.

[181] My thoughts are attested also by the words of him who was made perfect through practice, “the God who nourisheth me from my youth; the angel who saveth me from all evils” (Gen. 48:15, 16). For he, too, hereby confesses that the truly good gifts, which nourish virtue-loving souls, are referred to God alone as their cause, but on the other hand the province of things evil has been committed to angels (though neither have they full and absolute power of punishment), that nothing which tends to destruction should have its origin in Him whose nature is to save.

[157] Or again, what of that Israel who thought that neither heaven nor rainfall or well, or any created thing at all, was able to nourish him, but passed over all these and told his experience in the words “God who doth nourish me from my youth up”? (Gen. 48:15). Think you that all the waters which are gathered beneath the earth would seem to him worthy even of a glance?

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The task of providing a person’s food is more difficult than the redemption. While, with regard to the redemption, it is written: “The angel who has redeemed me from all evil” (Genesis 48:16), indicating that a mere angel is sufficient to protect a person from all evil; whereas, with regard to sustenance, it is written: “The God who has been my shepherd all my life long to this day” (Genesis 48:15). This verse implies that only God can help one who is struggling to earn a living.

He blessed Yoseif and said, Elohim before whom my fathers walked [served], Avraham, and Yitzchok, Elohim who was my shepherd [sustainer] from my inception until this day—

And he blessed Joseph, and said: The Lord, before whom my fathers Abraham and Izhak, did serve; the Lord who hath fed me since I have been unto this day,

Another approach to help us understand the line ‎ועשית בגדי ‏קודש לאהרן אחיך לכבוד ולתפארת‎: We know that of the twelve ‎months of the year 6 months belong to the season known as ‎‎“winter”, whereas the other 6 months are known as “summer.” ‎The twelve months correspond to the 12 lunar cycles each of ‎which is identified by star patterns described as ‎מזלות‎, ‎‎“constellation of stars in the sky.” Each month another one of ‎these constellations carries out its assigned tasks. The twelve ‎constellations may be summed up as 6 holy attributes, part of the ‎mystical ‎אור ישר ואור חוזר‎, “direct light emanating from the ‎source, and reflected light carrying the spiritual input by the ‎creatures who had encountered it. The six holy attributes are: 1) ‎man’s love for his Creator, and his desire to serve Him out of love ‎so as to provide Him with pleasure from His creatures. 2) The awe ‎in which man holds G’d; his dread of transgressing rules that ‎outlaw certain activities and defy His wishes. 3) the glory of G’d ‎that man must experience when he sees how G’d “boasts” of ‎man’s good deeds, compare Isaiah 49,3: ‎עבדי אתה ישראל אשר בך ‏אתפאר‎, “You are My servant Israel in whom I glory.” 4+5) the ‎faith Israel displays. These are two virtues, even though they ‎have a common heading. [The author had on a previous ‎occasion distinguished between faith which is totally oblivious of ‎any advantage one might personally gain from it, and faith which ‎is tied to certainty that G’d will reward one tangibly. Ed.] ‎‎6) The attribute of negating self interest by linking oneself ‎unreservedly to G’d and being completely content with whatever ‎it is that He has in mind for him.‎ The 12 constellations are represented in the gemstones of the ‎breastplate of the High Priest where they symbolize the 12 tribes ‎of the Jewish people, the holy nation.‎ The month of Adar corresponds to the tribe of Joseph ‎from whom 2 of the twelve tribes emerged. This is why when ‎there is a need to insert an extra month in the calendar to ‎compensate for the 11 days plus, that the lunar “year” is shorter ‎than the solar year, this month appears in our calendar as both ‎Adar I and Adar II. The appropriate zodiac sign for this month is ‎therefore that of ‎דגים‎, fish, which are a symbol of fertility as we ‎know from Genesis 48,16 where Yaakov blessed Joseph by ‎predicting that his sons’ offspring would be as numerous as that ‎of fish. Another example of Joseph’s numerous offspring is ‎alluded to in the words ‎בן פרת יוסף‎ “Joseph is a fruitful son.” ‎Genesis 49,22. Just as fish are safe from the evil eye, seeing they ‎are not visible on the earth’s surface, swimming beneath the ‎surface of the oceans, so the Talmud in B’rachot 20 ‎understands the words ‎עלי עין‎, in the same verse as the protection ‎afforded Joseph’s offspring from the potential damage from the ‎evil eye of people envious of them.‎ When the letters of the word ‎דג‎, “fish” are inverted, the result ‎is ‎גד‎, a word related to ‎מזל‎ in the sense of good fortune. (compare ‎Talmud Shabbat 67) There the sages accuse people who wish ‎themselves “that their mazzal, ‎גד‎ (protective star), not be ‎tired either by day of by night,” as uttering idolatrous phrases. In ‎the case of Joseph, whose two sons were called ‎מנשה‎ and ‎אפרים‎ ‎respectively, the former is an allusion to historically negative ‎phenomena, whereas the word ‎אפרים‎ is symbolic of historically ‎favourable occurrences. Joseph already presaged this when ‎naming his sons (Genesis 41,51-52) when he saw in the birth of ‎his first son a reminder of his years of suffering, whereas he ‎predicted a better future as being associated with the birth of his ‎second son. The month of Adar similarly symbolizes hard times ‎for the Jewish people during the first half, until after the 14th ‎when the nation during the reign of Ahasverus had been saved ‎from Haman’s wicked plots. According to the Talmud Shabbat 104, where ‎positioning of the letters and its symbolic significance is ‎discussed, the symbolism of the letters of the Jewish calendar ‎telling us something through the sequence in which they appear, ‎our sages see in the sequence ‎גד‎ an abbreviation of the words ‎גומל ‏דלים‎, “G’d at work in reversing the fate of the poor, (Jews in ‎exile)” The letter ‎ד‎ is understood to refer to the initial ‎subjugation of the Jewish people, whereas the letter ‎ג‎ is ‎understood as the subsequent turn for the better in the fortunes ‎of this people. This is used as a reversal of the normal ‎interpretation of such pairings of letters when the letter that is ‎later in the alphabet appearing first, is considered as a bad omen. ‎It was reserved for G’d to demonstrate that when He, as opposed ‎to astrological factors, i.e. mazzal, is involved, He can ‎reverse the predictions of the astrologers based on idolatry. ‎Besides, we must never forget that even when G’d subjects us to ‎harsh measures, the ultimate objective is to bring about our ‎repentance and subsequent redemption. The Purim story is the ‎best example of this, although it was unique in that not a hair of ‎a single Jew was touched on that occasion, the disaster having ‎been warded off by the people’s repentance in time.‎

‎The author now reverts back to Yaakov’s blessing of ‎Yehudah in Genesis 49,10 where Yaakov said: ‎לא יסור שבט מיהודה ‏ומחוקק מבין רגליו‎, commonly translated as: “the scepter shall not ‎depart from Yehudah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his ‎feet.” According to our author, if I understood him correctly, a ‎King’s primary concern is the political freedom of the people ‎under his rule and to ensure that they have adequate food ‎supplies. Midrash Tehillim 80,2 alludes to this when it states ‎that the provision of an adequate livelihood is more important ‎than the provision of political freedom, ‎גאולה‎, as the former is ‎provided by G’d personally, whereas the latter has been entrusted ‎to one of His angels. The author of the Midrash bases ‎himself on Genesis 48,16 where Yaakov commands the “angel” ‎who ensures political freedom, i.e. ‎המלאך הגואל‎, whereas ‎concerning the provision of adequate food supplies, i.e. ‎livelihood, this is something that G’d personally is involved in, ‎based on David in psalms 145,16 speaking of G’d opening His ‎hand to all living creatures (to supply their needs). In Exodus ‎‎23,20 the Torah also writes of the angel that G’d will send ahead ‎of the Jewish people,‎הנה אנכי שולח מלאך לפניך לשמרך בדרך וגו' ‏‎, ‎whereas when it came to supplying the manna, the Israelites’ ‎food, no mention is made of an angel being involved. This is also ‎how we must understand Song of Songs 8,10, “then I was in his ‎eyes as someone who has found an abundance of peace.”‎אז הייתי ‏בעיניו כמוצאת שלום רב‎. According to the Talmud Pessachim, ‎‎87 the composer, Solomon, compares the “bride,” simile for the ‎people of Israel, as feeling secure in the house of her husband, i.e. ‎G’d. In this verse Solomon also distinguishes between the “bride,” ‎and her “breasts” as two different parts of herself, an allusion to ‎the Jewish people either serving the Lord as “recipients,” or as ‎having attained a level where they are entitled to also feel as ‎‎“donors” vis a vis G’d as we have explained . The bride’s father in ‎law’s house is a simile for the ‎עלמא דנוקבא‎, whereas when ‎mention is made by the composer of ‎בית אביה‎, “her father’s ‎house,” this is an allusion to the ‎עלמא דדכורא‎, “the predominantly ‎masculine domain in the celestial spheres.” When the “human ‎donor” has succeeded to provide his Heavenly Father with joy ‎through the manner in which he serves Him, then, in the words ‎of Rav Chisda, his daughters would provide enduring joy to their ‎husbands.‎ Having appreciated this concept, we can also understand the ‎verse in which ‎גאולה‎, “political freedom”, as we termed it earlier, ‎when discussing the comparison made between the relative worth ‎of political freedom and an adequate livelihood in the two verses ‎quoted in Midrash Tehillim, 80,2. This Midrash is based ‎on Bereshit Rabbah 20,9 where two verses are cited, i.e. ‎suggesting that ‎גאולה‎ “redemption” has to occur on two levels. ‎Man has to be redeemed from the repercussions of Adam’s ‎original sin, and we have to be redeemed collectively from the ‎exile in which we have waited for the redeemer for 2000 years.‎ In the book ‎ראשית חכמה‎, by the famous Rabbi Eliyahu ‎Vidash, the point is made that due to man’s original sin he had ‎acquired (sustained) a blemish on his soul as an integral part of ‎his being. Just as physical man consists of 248 limbs and 365 ‎tendons, muscular tissue, a total of 613 parts corresponding to ‎the 613 commandments in the written Torah, so there is a ‎parallel division between 248 plus 365 parts in the spiritual part ‎of man, his soul. The “damage” inflicted on our souls is known as ‎חלל‎. In other words, any sin committed by one of these 613 parts ‎of his body results in commensurate damage, or ‎חלל‎ in his soul. In ‎order to cleanse the soul of these “holes,” it has to spend a period ‎of time in gehinom, purgatory, until this damage has been ‎repaired. This is man’s fate if he has not repented for his sins ‎prior to his death, of course.‎ When Moses, in Deut. 32,18 says ‎צור ילדך תשי ותשכח ‏אלמחוללך‎, where the name for G’d as both ‎צור‎ and ‎א-ל‎ is repeated, ‎this is also an allusion to the two types of ‎גאולה‎, redemption, we ‎need in order to recapture the pure state in which original man ‎had been created. When describing the impending redemption ‎after the people have done teshuvah Moses says:, ‎ושב ה' ‏אלוקיך את שבותך ורחמך ושב וקבצך מכל העמים אשר הפיצך ה' אלוקיך שמה‎, ‎‎“and the Lord your G’d will return with your captives and have ‎mercy upon you; and He will return and gather you in from ‎among all the nations that he had scattered you to.” (30,3) The ‎word: ‎ושב‎, appears to have been repeated twice for no good ‎reason. Actually, this verse alludes to two separate “returns” from ‎‎“exile,” the physical as well as spiritual exile suffered by the souls. ‎We find that just as when it came to ‎פרנסה‎, two verses describe ‎that G’d looks after this directly, i.e. for the nourishment of the ‎body as well as that for the soul, so when it comes to ‎‎“redemption”, a prerequisite for our being able to serve the Lord ‎with maximum devotion, both the body and the damaged soul ‎will be redeemed separately. Alternately, the two verses allude to ‎the concept that G’d is both dispenser of largesse and recipient of ‎the joy and selflessness that some of His creatures display by ‎serve Him.”

This is the explanation of “Then I will remember My covenant with Yaakov, and [also My covenant with Yitzchak, and also My covenant with Avraham I will remember; and I will remember the land]” (Leviticus 26:42). The explanation is: When will the Patriarchs be revealed in the world? When “I will remember the land”—by means of the air of the Land of Israel and by means of breath that is free of sin, which corresponds to the breath from the mouths of schoolchildren. This is because the schoolchildren were blessed, as is written (Genesis 48:16), “May he bless the lads, and let them carry my name, along with the names of my fathers.” By means of the schoolchildren, the Patriarchs are revealed to protect [the world]. Through the charity of the Land of Israel they are encompassed in the air of the Land of Israel, holy air, which is an aspect of breath that is free of sin.

we saw this kavra — The Jewish people are called “fish,” as in (Genesis 48:16), “May they increase in the land like fish.”

6. And by building Yerushalayim—i.e., the rectification of perfect fear in the heart—an angel is created that instills the vessels of prophecy with prophetic inspiration. Prophecy stems from the concept of the cherubs, as in “he heard the Voice… from between the two cherubs” (Numbers 7:89). Cherubs have a child’s face (Zohar I, 18b). They receive inspiration from the angel, as in (Genesis 48:16), “May the angel who redeems me from all evil bless the children”—i.e., “a child’s face,” the cherubs.

המלאך הגואל אותי, “the angel who redeems me;” in verse 15 Yaakov had commenced the blessing by referring to G-d by His name of “האלוהים,” whereas in this verse he has switched to an angel as the source of the blessing. How are we to account for this?The two verses have to be understood as follows: “The G-d before Whom I and my forefathers have walked by means of His angel who protected me against all harm; may He arrange for that same angel also to protect the lads who are your sons.”

ויקרא בהם שמי ושם אבותי, “and let my name be known through them together with the name of my fathers;” He prayed that just as the 12 tribes who were physical sons of Yaakov were described as his sons, so these two grandsons should also be described as his sons.

Let my name be called. They too would be called “Hebrews” (ivrim) — indicating their origin “across the [Euphrates] river” (eiver hanahar) — despite having been born in Egypt. Alternatively, their lineage would be traced to the Patriarchs despite their mother’s descent from Shechem; see 41:45 in the name of Tosafos.

[THE ANGEL WHO HATH REDEEMED ME.] The meaning of this will be found in the Torah portion Ve-eleh shemot (Ex. 23:20).

AND LET MY NAME BE NAMED IN THEM. All of Israel will be called Ephraim (The Bible refers to Israel as Ephraim in Hos. 7:1; 10:6; 11:3; 12:1; and Jer. 31-20. According to I.E. and let my name be named in them means that all of Israel will be called Ephraim. Nachmanides objects. He argues that if this were the interpretation they would also be called by the name of Manasseh since the text reads, in them.) and Joseph. (The Bible refers to Israel as Joseph in Ps. 80:2; 81:6; and Zech. 10:6.) Scripture also states, A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her children; she refuseth to be comforted for her children, Because they are not (Jer. 31:15), (The children of the other matriarchs also went into exile. However, the Bible mentions only Rachel weeping for her children. We thus see that all of Israel is called after Rachel’s children.) because Jacob considered Rachel to be his true mate. (The Hebrew reads, ikkar machasahvto, the main one of his thoughts. Rachel was the one Jacob originally wanted to marry and the one whom he loved. It was only due to circumstances that he married Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah.) Hence Scripture says, The sons of Rachel Jacob’s wife (Gen. 46:19). (Jacob’s wife is an appellation not used with reference to any of Jacob’s other wives.) Similarly, as soon as Rachel bore a son, Jacob said to Laban, Send me away, that I may go unto mine own place, and to my country (Gen. 30:25). He also gave the birthright to Joseph because he was the first born of his true mate. When Reuben showed himself unfit for the birthright he transferred it to Joseph who was Rachel’s first born, rather than to Dan or Gad because they were sons of the handmaidens. (Dan was Bilhah’s first born (Gen. 30:6). Gad was Zilpah’s first born (Gen. 30:11). Jacob thus gave the birthright to Joseph even though Dan and Gad were older than Joseph and were first born. He did this because Joseph was the first born of Rachel and they of handmaidens.) [17. HIS RIGHT HAND.] The right hand is more honored and is stronger than the left. (According to Weiser.)

In them may my name be recalled and the names of my fathers. That you recall for them all of what was taught concerning my name and the name of my ancestors. Because the name Israel is so named because "I have striven with beings divine and human (Genesis 32:29)." Thus he will be a righteous man, ruling through fear of God. And Jacob is so named because most of the goodness of the righteous is hidden, because their beginning is always with sorrow and their end is very exalted. And Abraham, is so named "Father of a multitude of nations (Genesis 17:4), thus they will be the head of all the nations. And Isaac is translated "And I rejoiced", thus there will always be joy in their dwellings.

המלאך הגואל אותי, "The angel who redeems me, etc." Jacob referred to any word of G'd which He issues to or on behalf of those those who love Him as מלאך. This is analogous to Psalms 29,7: "The voice of G'd kindles flames of fire." Jacob expressed the hope that G'd's word would always come to the assistance of Joseph's sons and bless them.

ויקרא בהם שמי, "and may my name be called upon them, etc." Jacob wished that Joseph's sons should reflect the spiritual level of the patriarchs. While it is quite impossible for any Jew to completely sever the connection with all three of the patriarchs, Jacob blessed Ephrayim and Menashe in that they would never fail to reflect the spiritual values of even one of the patriarchs.

Jacob may also have expressed the hope that the reputations of the patriarchs would be enhanced by the conduct of Joseph's sons in the future. We find such an idea in Proverbs 23,24: "the father of the righteous will rejoice greatly;" we also have a similar statement in Proverbs 17,6: "Grandchildren are the crown of their elders." All of this is predicated on the grandchildren following in the footsteps of their illustrious forebears.

Jacob also hinted that mentioning the names of Ephrayim and Menashe would have as positive an effect in the ears of G'd as has mentioning the names of the patriarchs themselves. This sentiment is expressed in Jeremiah 31,19 when the prophet exclaims that every time G'd merely hears the name of Ephrayim mentioned He recalls him with feelings of mercy and has pity on his plight.

וידגו לרוב בקרב הארץ, "and they will multiply on earth just like fish." Jacob's considerations may have been similar to the blessings G'd bestowed on the fish in Genesis 1,22.1 explained there that a special blessing for the fish was called for due to their habitat being less suited for successful and enduring procreation than the conditions prevailing on dry land. G'd therefore increased the fish's natural reproductive powers to counter the negative conditions prevailing in their habitat. Jacob too accorded Joseph's sons greater powers of reproduction when he blessed them by comparing their fruitfulness to that of fish. Inasmuch as Ephrayim and Menashe did not reside in regions which are hostile to human reproduction, Jacob's blessing was even stronger than G'd's blessing for the fish.

Jacob deliberately chose to say בקרב, "in the midst of the earth," instead of merely saying "on earth." This was a hint that at some time in the future Joseph's descendants would "hide" within the earth as we know from Sotah 36 where Joshua is reported as having advised the members of that tribe to hide in the forests (to prevent attracting envy and jealousy due to their being numerous). This need arose only because Jacob's blessing had been fulfilled and they had multiplied at a faster rate than the other tribes. Berachot 55 sees in Jacob's phraseology a hint that the descendants of Joseph would be immune to the evil eye just as the fish are immune to the evil eye. The fish enjoy that status only thanks to their remaining under the surface of the water and therefore not visible. Jacob blessed the sons of Joseph that they would enjoy this immunity even while visible on earth, i.e. בקרב הארץ.

ויקרא בהם שמי ושם אבותי, he meant that Joseph would be called Israel on occasion, as for instance in Psalms 80,2 רועה ישראל האזינה נהג כצאן יוסף, “Give ear O shepherd of Israel who leads Joseph like a flock.” Also in Amos 6,6 we read ולא נחלו על שבר יוסף, “but they are not concerned about the ruin of Joseph;” (Joseph being a euphemism for Israel, of course) The author quotes several more verses proving the same point, i.e. that Joseph is being equated with his father Israel, i.e. is the spiritual continuation of his father Yisrael, the founder of the 12 tribes. Psalms 80,3 uses the same simile for Joseph’s sons Ephrayim and Menashe when writing לפני אפרים ובנימין ומנשה עוררה את גבורתך ולכה לישועתך לנו, “at the head of Ephrayim, Benjamin, and Menashe! Rouse Your might and come to our help!”

וידגו לרב, may the multiply like fish.

AND LET MY NAME BE CALLED ON THEM. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that it means that all Israel be called by the name Ephraim, (As in the verse: Is Ephraim a darling son unto me? (Jeremiah 31:19), the reference there being to all Israel.) just as they are called “the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” This is not correct for Scripture uses the word bahem (on them), [thus referring to both Ephraim and Menasheh], and they were not called by the name of Menasheh. But perhaps this is because they were called the house of Joseph. (Zechariah 10:6. And I will help the house of Joseph.) The correct interpretation though is that their race and their name will exist forever, and the name of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob will forever be upon them.

ויקרא בהם שמי, may their seed and the seed of their see live.

וידגו, the root is of the same category as the ones which lose the last root letter in the future tense, such as בכה, “to cry,” ויבכו, “they will cry,” or שבה, “to capture,” וישבו, “they will capture.”

המלאך הגאל אתי THE ANGEL REDEEMING ME — The angel who was usually sent to me in my trouble, as it is said, (Genesis 31:11) “And the angel of God said unto me in the dream: Jacob etc. … (Genesis 31:13), I am the God of Beth-el.”

יברך את הנערים SHALL BLESS THE LADS — viz, Manasseh and Ephraim.

וידגו AND LET THEM INCREASE — like fishes (דגים) which are fruitful and which multiply and which the evil eye cannot effect (Berakhot 20a).

Es ist sehr schwer, in diesem Zusammenhange von einem Engel auszusprechen, daß er segnen solle, zumal da unmittelbar zuvor Gott genannt ist, in dessen Händen ja allein der Segen liegt. In ב"ר Kap. 97 spricht sich ר׳ אליעזר nach der Lesart des Jalkut also aus: הקיש גאולה לפרנסה ופרנסה לגאולה מה גאולה פלאים אף פרנסה פלאים מה פרנסה בכל יום אף גאולה בכל יום, ,"es sind hier die Ernährung (הרועה) und die Erlösung einander wechselseitig gleichgestellt; wie die Erlösung, so geschieht auch die Ernährung durch Wunder, und wie die Ernährung, ist auch die Erlösung täglich". Somit haben wir hier nicht an die Erlösung aus einer besonderen Gefahr, sondern an jene Erlösung zu denken, deren wir Tag für Tag wie der Ernährung bedürfen. Beide, Parnaßa und Geula, sind keine Ergebnisse der einmal von Gott allgemein gesetzten Weltordnung, sondern Wirkungen der besonderen göttlichen Fürsorge. Daß der Rechtschaffene, Gewissenhafte nur auf redlichem, sittlichem Wege sein Brot Suchende auf diesem Wege sein Brot finde, ist פלאים, ist ein jedesmaliges Geschenk der göttlichen Waltungswunder, wie es heißt: טרף נתן ליראיו יזכור לעולם בריתו, "was andere der Gewalt verdanken, gibt Er seinen Verehrern, Er ist unaufhörlich seines Bundes eingedenk". Und daß der also nur sittlich dahin wandelnde Mensch in einer mit physischen und sozialen Übeln drohenden Welt unangefochten aufrecht bleibt, dazu bedarf er der steten göttlichen Erlösung, der steten גאולה.

גאל, verwandt mit Kohle: ein brennbarer Stoff, der bereits im Feuer gelegen, ihm aber entzogen wurde, ehe das Feuer ihn vollständig bewältigte. (So auch געל: etwas vor der Zeit hinauswerfen aus der Hülle, in welcher es sich befindet; allein während גאל zur Rettung, bedeutet געל in entgegengesetztem Sinne: etwas aus seiner bis dahin schützenden und nährenden Hülle hinauswerfen). גאולה ist aber die vollkommene Rettung, die nicht wie גחל noch die Spuren des Brandes an sich tragen, sondern gänzlich frei und unversehrt lässt, wie Abraham aus dem Feuer Chaldäas, wie Daniels Genossen aus der Glut des Ofens. Hätten wir Augen zu sehen, bemerkt ein Wort der Weisen, wir würden es gewahren, wie wir überall und immer von מזיקים, von schädlich auf uns einwirkenden Elementen in der physischen Welt umgeben sind, und wie im physischen, so wahrlich auch im sozialen Leben. Wehe uns, wenn wir dafür nicht blind wären. Wohl uns, daß wir die Gefahren des Todes nicht sehen, denen wir jeden Augenblick in der physischen Welt entgehen, noch das von Neid und Bosheit uns zugedachte Verderben und Unheil gewahren, das im sozialen Leben täglich und stündlich uns unbewusst an uns vorüberziehen mag. Das ist das רע, aus welchem הב"ה uns jeden Augenblick rettet, und zwar also rettet, daß wir uns der Gefahr nicht einmal bewusst werden. Nun bemerkt ר׳ שמואל בר נחמן daselbst: פרנסה גדולה מן הגאולה שהגאולה ע"י מלאך פרנסה ע"י הב"ה „größer ist noch die Ernährung als die Erlösung, diese geschieht durch einen Engel (המלאך הגואל) jene durch הב"ה selbst“. Verstehen wir diesen Satz recht, so liegt ihm die Wahrheit zu Grunde, daß die stete Geula von Untergang drohenden Übeln ja der Parnaßa vorangehen muss, die bloße Existenz des Menschen überhaupt bedingt, somit ein Moment ist, das von vornherein mit dem Dasein eines Menschen- oder Volks-Individunms gegeben sein muss, gleichsam der Raum ist, der ihm innerhalb des Weltgetriebes durch die göttliche Fügung geschaffen ist. Es ist dies das "Geschick" des Menschen, bei welchem der Jude aber stets an den "Schickenden" denkt, das ihm stets "מלאך", "Bote" der göttlichen Fürsehung bleibt. Es ist die göttliche Bestimmung, die bei dem Eintritt eines Menschenkindes oder eines Volkes ins physische, soziale oder historische Dasein "es soll leben!" spricht, und seinen מלאכים, seinen "Geschickten", für es befiehlt, "es zu hüten auf allen seinen Wegen, es auf Händen zu tragen, daß es an keinem Stein den Fuß verletze, daß es über Schakal und Otter dahinwandle, Leu und Schlangen zertrete" (Psalm 91). Vielleicht ist das Wort מלאך ja von מלך gebildet, eine bewältigend wirkende Macht, die aber nicht aus eigener MachtVollkommenheit wirkt, sondern ׳א, das Zeichen einer andern sie leitenden und sendenden Persönlichkeit unsichtbar in sich trägt: buchstäblich שמי בקרבו, wie es vom מלאך heißt). Jakob wünscht also, daß Gott seine Enkel durch denselben מלאך, durch welchen Er ihn von allem Übel erlöst, gesegnet werden lassen möge, d. h. daß seine Enkel daßelbe "Geschick" weiter tragen mögen, innerhalb dessen und durch welches Gott ihn Existenz und Gedeihen hat finden lassen, daß sie ebensowenig wie Jakob, etwa Esau gleich, auf eigener Faust und eigenem Schwerte leben, sondern, Jakob gleich, nur in Gott ihren Schutz und Beistand suchen und finden mögen; nur so ויקרא וגו׳ werden er und seine Väter in ihnen fortleben. וידגו לרב בקרב הארץ.

וידגו: Nie wieder kommt das Wort דגה vor, nur als Wurzel von דג, Fisch, ist es bekannt und bezeichnet eben als solches in ganzer Tiefe die Innigkeit des Jakobsegens und die Bedeutung dessen, was das Teilen des Jakobsgeschickes und das Forttragen des Jakobnamens enthält, was es heißt: vor demselben Gott wie die Väter wandeln, sich von demselben Gott führen und durch dieselbe Gottessendung retten lassen! — In gesondertem Elemente, still, in vom Menschenauge unerreichter Tiefe lebt die Fischwelt ihr Leben. Gedankenlos geht der Mensch am Ufer hin und ahnet nicht, welch fröhliches, frisches, glückliches, ungetrübtes Leben sich da unten in reicher Fülle von Geschlecht zu Geschlecht entfaltet. So בקרב הארץ, so in Mitte der Erde soll das Jakobsgeschlecht in seinem gesonderten Elemente, wohin die umgebende Welt ihm nicht zu folgen, dessen Bedeutung sie nicht zu ahnen vermag, ihr stilles, glücklich eigenes Leben vollbringen, "fischgleich", "gleichsam im Wasser in Mitten der Menschheit auf Erden" ,בגו בני אנשא על ארעא כנוני ימא יסגון (ת"א).

המלאך הגואל אותי מכל רע יברך, the letter ה introducing the word המלאך is not a definitive article, identifying a specific angel [seeing that we had not previously heard about him; Ed] but acts as an appeal, instruction to such angel(s) who in the past on different occasions had been Yaakov’s guardian angels(s). Yaakov appeals to his own guardian angels to bless the children if their own merit does not suffice for the guardian angels assigned to them to do the job.

ויקרא בהם שמי ושם אבותי אברהם ויצחק. Although we know that Avraham and Yitzchok were both Yaakov’s fathers, he meant to make plain that he did not appeal to the god of Terach or Nachor who were similarly his “fathers” in the sense of being his ancestors. It is an axiom throughout Scripture that the righteous are never linked to those of their ancestors who were wicked, i.e. idolaters. The same is true in reverse as our sages say in Sanhedrin 52, (but not found there) קרינן לרשיעא אפילו בר צדיקא רשיעא בר רשיעא, “a wicked person, even if he is the son of a righteous person is still called a wicked person son of a wicked person.” This principle is invoked in order to save the righteous father the embarrassment of being associated with his son who has turned from the path of righteousness. When the ancestry of such a wicked person requires to be mentioned, one prefers to link him to another wicked person in his lineage. This is why Yaakov prayed for the lads that they should remain G’d fearing and prepared to serve Him. If they were to do this they would qualify to be described as offspring of Avraham and Yitzchok. This principle is known as יחד לבבי ליראה את ה', “let my heart be undivided in reverence for Your name.” (Psalms 86,11)

The angel who was usually sent to me in my time of affliction... [Rashi knows this] because an angel is unable to redeem anyone without Hashem’s permission.

Menasheh and Ephraim. If Rashi did not specifically explain this, we would think that it cannot mean Ephraim and Menasheh. Since it is specifically written in v. 20 that Yaakov blessed them, why then would he bless them again? Thus we would have thought that “the lads” were Yoseif’s young sons. Therefore Rashi explains that it refers to Menasheh and Ephraim. [Rashi knows this] because Yoseif did not have other sons. And why did he bless them twice? The answer is: Here it is written, “He blessed Yoseif,” and he included them in Yoseif’s blessing but did not bless them on their own. In v. 20 he gave them their own blessing. But to me it seems [that Rashi knew it means Menasheh and Ephraim] because it is written “the lads,” meaning those mentioned above, and only Menasheh and Ephraim were mentioned. Furthermore, Yoseif is not known to have had any other sons. The proof is that on v. 6, Rashi explained אשר הולדת to mean, “If you will have any more sons.” (Kitzur Mizrachi)

May the angel, a messenger of God, who delivers me from all evil and who has protected me until now, bless the lads, as the representative of God, its sender. And the first blessing is: Let my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, be called upon them, these two children, as well. Having previously adopted them as his own sons, Jacob adds that they shall continue his and his forebears’ legacy. Just as God guided Jacob and his fathers throughout their lives, so too He will lead his grandchildren. The second blessing is: May they proliferate like fish in the midst of the earth . 8

המלאך הגואל אותי, “the angel that has redeemed me, etc. Some commentators understand this as a reference to G’d Who had shepherded Yaakov by means of an angel, seeing that no angel has independent powers such as attributed to him by Yaakov here. There is little doubt that the words המלאך and האלוקים which are used interchangeably (here 15 and 16) refer to the same Divine manifestation, but when viewed by the immediate recipient of the miraculous providence of G’d, appear as a more immediate Divine providence than when viewed by bystanders, who did not experience this on their own bodies. [my wording, but I trust the author’s meaning. Ed.]

ויקרא בהם שמי ושם אבותי, “and may my name and the name of my forefathers be declared upon them.” Ibn Ezra explains that Yaakov wishes that the Jewish people be known as “the children of Ephrayim,” just as they are known as “the children of Avraham Yitzchok and Yisrael.” Nachmanides disagrees, seeing that the verse addresses itself to both Ephrayim and Menashe, even though Ephrayim may have been mentioned ahead of his senior brother. History shows that although traditionally, the Jewish people have been referred to as “Ephrayim,” by some prophets, Menashe has never been used as an alternative for “the seed of Avraham, Yitzchok, and Yisrael.” Perhaps what Yaakov meant was that the Jewish people appear collectively as “the house of Joseph” in a number of prophecies by our prophets. The plain meaning of the blessing appears to be that just as the descendants of Avraham, Yitzchok, and Yisrael are blessed and assured of eternal continuity, so Yaakov wishes that the same may apply to the seed of both Ephrayim and Menashe, individually, as tribes.

“May they be teeming multitudes upon the earth” [48:16]. Jacob blessed the children of Joseph that they should be so numerous as the fish in the water, and no evil eye should have dominion over them. That is to say, that nobody should be able to give them the evil eye, like the fish in the water that cannot be given an evil eye. (Rashi, Genesis, 48:16.)

In the daytime, after the Hakafos, three Sifrei Torah are left out, and many people are called up to one Seifer Torah, to read the portion Vezos haberachah up to Me'onah (Deut. 33:27) repeating it many times. At the end, all the young boys are called up. It is proper that a boy who is bar mitzvah should say the berachah and that the others should listen. (They will be exempt with his berachah.) The verse Hamalach hagoel is read for them (According to Levush this verse is recited over them as an oral blessing, but it is not read. (Ibid 669:14)) [The angel who delivered me] etc. (Genesis 48:16). After that, the Chasan Torah is called up and he reads from Me'onah to the end [of the Torah]. In the second Seifer Torah, the Chasan Bereishis reads. Then half-kaddish is said. In the third Seifer Torah, Maftir is read. (see chapter 79:1 above) It is the custom in many communities to be mindful to call up an eminent person for Chasan Torah. Even a person who was called up already for the reading of Vezos haberachah, may still be called up as Chasan Torah or as Chasan Bereishis. Where there are only two Sifrei Torah, Vezos haberachah should be read in one, and Bereishis in the other one, and the first seifer is taken again for Maftir.

(Gen. 48:16) “the angel who redeems me” -- “The angel who redeems” is the Angel of Yosef. This means that as soon as Yosef was born, Jacob was able to overpower Esau. As known, the redeemer is in Yesod.

Now that you know this, know that He is sometimes called the Redeemer-גואל for the following reason. Know that when His quality as the Living God-El Chai-א"ל חי bonds with His quality of Lordship-Adona”y-אדנ"י, this being the matter of Redemption-Geulah-גאולה and Prayer-Tefillah-תפילה, His quality of Lordship-Adona”y-אדנ"י becomes filled with the influence of Redemption-Geulah-גאולה and then His quality of Lordship-Adona”y-אדנ"י brings about Redemption-Geulah-גאולה as the agent of the Living God-El Chai-א"ל חי and rescues the Righteous, redeeming them all from being smitten by any sickness and any kind of destruction and retribution. At such times it is called, The Redeeming Angel-HaMalach HaGoel-המלאך הגואל. Since HaShem’s-יהו"ה quality of Lordship-Adona”y-אדנ"י is called the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו"ה – the Shechinah – it would travel with Yaakov as the agent of HaShem’s-יהו"ה quality as the Living God-El Chai-א"ל חי, as he said, (Genesis 28:20-21) “If God will be with me and will guard me on this way upon which I go, giving me bread to eat and clothing to wear and returning me in peace to my father’s house, then HaShem-יהו"ה will be my God.” Since this quality went with Yaakov to redeem him from every kind of destruction, Yaakov called it, (Genesis 48:16) “the angel who redeems me (HaMalach HaGoel-המלאך הגואל) from all evil.” The reason he called this quality an angel-Malach-מלאך is because it does not bring about redemption-Geulah-גאולה except as the agent of HaShem’s-יהו"ה quality as the Living God-El Chai-א"ל ח"י, being that it itself is also in need of redemption-Geulah-גאולה, as our sages, of blessed memory said, (Midrah Bamidbar Rabbah 7:10) “When they were exiled to Egypt the Indwelling Presence of HaShem-יהו"ה – the Shechinah-שכינה – was with them.” Therefore, when His quality of Lordship-Adona”y-אדנ"י brings about redemption-Geulah-גאולה, it does so as the agent of His quality as the Living God-El Chai-א"ל חי and is thus called, the Redeeming Angel-HaMalach HaGoel-המלאך הגואל. That is, the agent is called by the name of the one who sent him.

He said to them: ‘I am he, son of one fish (nuna) that swims in the great sea, and who swallowed all the other fish in the sea, and then took them out alive, and sometimes he emerges on dry land, in order to fulfil: (Gen. 48:16) And they shall proliferate (yiDGu) in the midst of the land.’ They were astonished.

Said the child: I am not afraid of an evil eye, for I am the son of a great and precious fish, and a fish does not fear from the evil eye, as it is written: "and they shall multiply abundantly like fish upon the earth" (Genesis 48:16). What is meant by "abundantly"? To rise above the eye. And we have taught, just like water covers the fish of the sea, and there is no evil eye, and so on. Abundantly--certainly! "Upon the earth," meaning among the people of the earth. They said: son, angel of God, there is no evil eye within us, and we do not come from the side of the Evil Eye. Besides, the Holy One, Blessed be He, protects you with His wings.

He opened and said: "The Angel who has redeemed me from all harm--Bless..." Jacob said this verse with a spirit of holiness, and if he said it with a spirit of holiness, there is a secret of wisdom in it. "The Angel"--Jacob called the Shekhinah by this name, and elsewhere he called the Shekhinah other names. Here, why did he call her "Angel?" It must be because when she is a messenger from above, she receives radiance from within the speculum above. And when this is so, Father and Mother bless her, and say to her, My daughter, go protect your house, attend to your house. Do this for your house. Go and feed them. Go, for that world below is waiting for you, your family members wait for sustenance from you; here is all that you need to give them. This is why she is "the Angel."

Rabbi Elazar said: Even in that time it was the Holy One, blessed be He. Because what is written here, "the angel of Hashem," is analogous to "The angel who redeemed me" (Gen. 48:16) and also to "the angel of Elohim" (Shemot 14:19). For better or for worst, the Holy One, blessed be He, shall always govern this land. For the best - because the land of Yisrael was never passed on to any other supernal governor. And all the other inhabitants of the world should be ashamed of their deeds. For the worst - (Hashem rules in order) to prevent the other ministers from delighting in ruling over it.

in the midst of the world. (Genesis 48:16)

The angel who redeemed me from all evil (These are the words used by Jacob when he blessed Joseph, and his sons Ephraim and Menashe.—Genesis 48:16)

Blessed is Adonoy by day, Blessed is Adonoy by night. Blessed is Adonoy when we lie down Blessed is Adonoy when we rise. For in Your hand are the souls of the living and the dead, (as it is written): For in His hand is the soul of every living thing and the spirit of every human being. In Your hand, I commit my spirit; You have liberated me, Adonoy, Almighty of truth. Our God in heaven, reveal the unity of Your Name, preserve Your kingdom always, and reign over us forever and ever.

The angel who redeemed me from all evil (These are the words used by Jacob when he blessed Joseph, and his sons Ephraim and Menashe.—Genesis 48:16) May he bless the lads; and may they be called by my name and the names of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac; and may they multiply like fish within the land.

The angel who redeemed me from all evil (These are the words used by Jacob when he blessed Joseph, and his sons Ephraim and Menashe.—Genesis 48:16) May he bless the lads; and may they be called by my name and the names of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac; and may they multiply like fish within the land.

The angel who redeemed me from all evil (These are the words used by Jacob when he blessed Joseph, and his sons Ephraim and Menashe.—Genesis 48:16)

Chapter 5 of the Prophets. [1] "Ephraim is a dear son to me" (Jeremiah 31:20). It is written (Proverbs 4:3), "For I was a son to my father," and come and see that even though the children of Israel are a thousand thousand and myriad myriads, they are not important before the Omnipresent except like an only son. As it is written, "The Lord, your God, has multiplied you" (Deuteronomy 1:10). And when they were in Egypt, what is written? "And the Children of Israel were fruitful and increased abundantly" (Exodus 1:7). "Fruitful," like Adam and Eve, and "increased," that they multiplied more than fish. "And multiplied" - more than the blessing of Noah and his sons. "And grew strong" - they grew strong from the strength of the Patriarchs. "Exceedingly, exceedingly" - there was a woman who gave birth to sixty myriads at one time, like fish that give birth to sixty myriads, so too they. And Jacob blessed them, "And let them grow into a multitude" (Genesis 48:16), just as the fish were blessed, so too were they. And Ezekiel says, "As the produce of the field, so have you multiplied" (Ezekiel 16:7). All these were not important before Him except like one only, as it is written, "My firstborn son is Israel" (Exodus 4:22), and it is written, "Let My son go, that he may serve Me" (Exodus 4:23). Therefore it says, "For I was a son to my father," just like a son of man when he is a small child, if he sins, his father does not remove him because he is small. But when he grows up and stands on his own feet, if he sins, his father removes him. Similarly, Israel, even when they sin unintentionally, it is counted to them as if they are like small children, as it is written, "When Israel was a youth, then I loved him" (Hosea 11:1). "Ephraim is a dear son to me." (Jeremiah 31:20)

Chapter (71) 72: Writings [1] A Song of Ascents. "Many times they have afflicted me from my youth, and so on" (Psalm 129:1) It is said in scriptures: "In all their affliction, He was not afflicted" (Isaiah 63:9). If Israel does the will of the Almighty in all their troubles, then He is afflicted with them, but if they do not do His will in their troubles, then He is not afflicted with them. This is evident from the incident in Egypt where the Israelites made bricks from straw and were revealed to Moses at the burning bush as if they were making them from precious stones (Exodus 24:10). Thus it is written, "I am with him in trouble" (Psalm 91:15) and "the angel of His presence saved them" (Isaiah 63:9). This angel, who sees the Almighty's face every day, is their savior. Jacob also said, "the angel who has redeemed me" (Genesis 48:16). Through His love (Isaiah 63:9) and in the merit of Abraham, who loved Him, twenty generations hated Him, but when Abraham appeared, they loved Him. Through His mercy (Isaiah 63:9) and in the merit of Isaac, who was almost sacrificed, it is written, "do not lay a hand on the boy" (Genesis 22:12). He Himself redeemed them (Isaiah 63:9) in the merit of Jacob, as it is written, "The Lord redeemed Jacob" (Isaiah 48:20). Raised them (Isaiah 63:9) from the sea and exalted them (Isaiah 63:9), in the desert, All the days of old.(Isaiah 63:9) In the land of Israel. Another interpretation: "they were sustained by manna in the desert and were lifted up (carried) in the wilderness all the days of eternity in Shiloh." Another interpretation:"And He carried them in the clouds [in the wilderness], and He raised them up in the desert [in the Promised Land], all the days of eternity [i.e. forever] in the land of Israel. Another interpretation: "And He carried them in the manna, and He raised them up in the wilderness, all the days of eternity in Shiloh." Another interpretation: "And they were sustained by manna in the first Temple, and they were lifted up in the desert, all the days of eternity in Shiloh. And they will be sustained in the future Temple, and lifted up in the second Temple, all the days of eternity, as it is said, 'One thing I ask of the Lord, this is what I seek: that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life' (Psalms 27:4)." Alternatively, He carried them in the monarchy of the House of David, and He will lift them in the monarchy of the Messiah, all the days of this eternal world, as it is said, "The Lord will reign forever and ever" (Exodus 15:18)."

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:49). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]….” – this is the offering that he presented in the name of Jacob, who had him precede Manasseh, and in the name of Joseph, who, because of his love, Jacob blessed him all those blessings, just as it says: “He blessed Joseph and said: The God [before whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked…]” (Genesis 48:15), and it says: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh…” (Genesis 48:20). “Dish [kaarat]” – this is Jacob; do not read it as kaarat, but rather, as akeret, who uprooted [akar] the right hand from Manasseh in favor of Ephraim. “Silver” – after, “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20); what he said to Joseph: “His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know; he too shall become a people…” (Genesis 48:19). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – corresponding to the one hundred and thirty words that there are from “he laid it on Ephraim’s head” (Genesis 48:14) until “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – this is Joseph, who was cast away [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “One” – as he was king in Egypt, just as it says: “One of the people (Avimelekh said this referring to himself.) almost lay [with your wife]” (Genesis 26:10). Likewise it says: “Joseph was the ruler over the land…” (Genesis 42:6). “Silver” – after “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver,” as due to his wisdom he was privileged to achieve kingship, just as it says: “After God has disclosed all this to you.… You will be in charge of my house…” (Genesis 41:39–40). “Seventy shekels in the sacred shekel” – as Gabriel came and added one letter from the name of the Holy One blessed be He to his name and taught him seventy languages, as it is stated: “He established it as a precept for Joseph [bihosef] (He added a heh, changing Joseph [Yosef] to Yehosef.) when he went out over Egypt; I learned a language I had not known” (Psalms 81:6), as were it not so, the Egyptians would not have accepted Joseph to rule over them. “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” – Jacob and Joseph were both full-fledged righteous men, and the two of them resembled one another. This accords with what Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph” (Genesis 37:2). It should have said nothing other than: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Reuben.” Why is it stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”? It is to teach you that Joseph resembled his father in every respect. Just as Jacob was born circumcised, so too, Joseph was born circumcised. Just as this one, his mother was barren, so too, that one, his mother was barren. Just as this one, his mother suffered from the pain of her pregnancy, so too that one, his mother suffered during birth. Just as this one, his mother bore two, so too that one, his mother bore two. Just as this one, his brother seeks to kill him, this one, too, his brothers seek to kill him. This one, his brother hates [soneh] him, and that one, likewise. This one is a shepherd and that one is a shepherd. This one is hated [nistam] and that one is hated. (See Genesis 27:41, 49:23.) This one was stolen from twice: “Stolen in the day and stolen at night” (Genesis 31:39); that one, there is a double expression of stealing: “For I was abducted [gunov gunavti] [from the land of the Hebrews]” (Genesis 40:15). This one was blessed with ten blessings, (See Genesis 27:28–29.) and that one was blessed with ten blessings. (See Deuteronomy 33:13–17.) This one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel, and that one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel. This one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel, and that one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel. This one begot children outside of the Land of Israel, and that one begot children outside of the Land of Israel. This one, angels accompanied him, and that one, angels accompanied him. (A midrash says that when Joseph went to his brothers at the behest of his father, three angels accompanied him.) This one ascended to greatness by means of a dream (See Genesis 28:10–16.) and that one ascended to greatness by means of a dream. This one, his father-in-law’s household was blessed on his account, and that one, his father-in-law’s (According to Bereshit Rabba 86:3, Joseph’s father-in-law Potifera was Potifar.) household was blessed on his account. This one descended to Egypt, and that one descended to Egypt. This one ended the famine and that one ended the famine. (See Bereshit Rabba 89:9.) This one administered an oath to his son, and that one administered an oath to his brothers. This one died in Egypt, and that one died in Egypt. This one was embalmed, and that one was embalmed. This one, his bones ascended, and that one, his bones ascended. Because Joseph resembled his father, that is why it is stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”; and that is why it is stated: “Both of them full…” – regarding Jacob and Joseph. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:50). “One…ladle [kaf]” – it corresponds to the palm of his right hand, which he placed on Ephraim’s head. Why does it call it “one”? It is because it is more significant than the left. “Gold…ten shekels” – it corresponds to the ten words that there are from: “Israel extended his right hand” (Genesis 48:14) until “and he was the younger” (Genesis 48:14). “Filled with incense” – Jacob saw this matter through the divine spirit, that Ephraim was worthy for him to place his right hand on his head. Likewise it says: “Guiding [sikel] his hands, as Manasseh was the first born” (Genesis 48:14). His hands were guided [hiskilu] by the divine spirit, just as it says: “Maskil of Eitan the Ezraḥite” (Psalms 89:1). (This is a psalm stated by Eitan the Ezraḥite with divine guidance.) “One young bull, one ram, one sheep in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:51). “One young [ben bakar] bull” – corresponding to Abraham, as it is stated: “Abraham ran to the cattle [habakar]” (Genesis 18:7). “One ram” – corresponding to Isaac, in whose regard it is written: “[Abraham…] took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son” (Genesis 22:13). “One sheep” – corresponding to Jacob, in whose regard it is written: “Jacob separated the sheep” (Genesis 30:40). Why did he sacrifice these three kinds of burnt offerings? It corresponds to the three patriarchs, corresponding to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “Let my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, be called upon them” (Genesis 48:16). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:52). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Elishama son of Amihud” (Numbers 7:53). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to Joseph, as it is written: “They slaughtered a goat” (Genesis 37:31). Why did he sacrifice this corresponding to Joseph? It is because when Jacob blessed them with the name of the three patriarchs, likewise, he blessed them with the name of Joseph and made them dependent upon him, as it is stated: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the two blessings that he blessed them: the former, “[may the angel…] bless the lads” (Genesis 48:16), and the latter, “by you Israel shall bless….” “Five rams, [five goats, five lambs]” – three species, corresponding to three generations that Joseph saw for Ephraim, who were attributed to Joseph, and they were patrilineal houses, as it is stated: “Joseph saw great-grandchildren from Ephraim” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise it says: “These are the sons of Ephraim by their families: Of Shutelaḥ.… And these are the sons of Shutelaḥ: Of Eran…” (Numbers 26:35–36). Ephraim, Shutelaḥ, Eran, these are three sons from three generations. Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five words (In the Hebrew phrase.) of “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20), as it is from there that Ephraim merited to present his offering first. “This was the offering…” – because he presented the offering in this order, the Holy One blessed be He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Elishama….”

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:55). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]…” – do not read it as kaarat, but rather as akart, corresponding to Jacob, who extracted [akar] the birthright (The birthright refers to the extra portion of the inheritance that the eldest son received.) from Reuben and gave it to Joseph: “I have given you one portion more than your brothers…” (Genesis 48:22). “Silver” – just as it says: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20), just as he (Silver alludes to the statement made by Jacob, who was righteous.) said: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be for me like Reuben and Simeon” (Genesis 48:5). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – when Jacob descended to Egypt on account of Joseph, he was one hundred and thirty years old, as it is stated: “Jacob said to Pharaoh: The days of the years of my residence are one hundred and thirty years” (Genesis 47:9). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – corresponding to Joseph, who was cast [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “Silver” – after: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20) – what he said to his father (Silver alludes to the statement made by Joseph, who was righteous.) : “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn; place your right hand upon his head” (Genesis 48:18). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel” – as it was through him that seventy people descended to Egypt. “Both of them full…” – Jacob and Joseph, both of them were full-fledged righteous men and both produced tribes. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:56). “One gold ladle of ten shekels…” – corresponding to the ten districts of Manasseh, as it is stated: “Ten districts fell to Manasseh” (Joshua 17:5). “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:57). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:58). “One young bull, one ram [one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering]; one goat…” – these (This is a reference to the three burnt offerings.) are three corresponding to the three generations that Joseph saw from Manasseh that received a portion in the land, (This is a reference to the fact that there were three major families named after the three generations following Manasseh, in addition to the family which was named after Manasseh himself. Therefore, the phrase “the sons of Makhir” refers to Makhir himself, Gilad, and Iezer.) as it is stated: “The children of Makhir son of Manasseh, too, were born at Joseph’s knees” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise, it says: “The sons of Manasseh: For Makhir, the family of the Makhirites, and Makhir begot Gilad.… These are the sons of Gilad: Of Iezer…” (Numbers 26:29–30). Makhir, Gilad, and Iezer – these are three generations that were patrilineal houses that were attributed to Joseph, as Manasseh is attributed to Jacob, just as it says: “And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before my coming to you to Egypt, they are mine” (Genesis 48:5). The fourth, this was Ya’ir son of Manasseh, who received a portion in the land, just as it says: “Ya’ir son of Manasseh went and captured their villages [ḥavot], and he called them Ḥavot Ya’ir” (Numbers 32:41). The three species of burnt offerings corresponded to the sons of Makhir son of Manasseh. (This is referring to what was mentioned above, and is mentioned again since the midrash now also explains what the sin offering signifies.) The goat sin offering corresponded to Ya’ir, who did not bequeath his portion to his sons, because he did not have sons. That is why he called them (The villages.) by his name, because he did not have any remnant, and the sons of his brother Makhir inherited his portion. “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Gamliel son of Pedatzur” (Numbers 7:59). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the tribe of Manasseh, which split into two and received two portions in the land, half of it on the east bank of the Jordan and half in the land of Canaan. “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these are three species, corresponding to three things that Joseph did on behalf of Manasseh, whom he sought to elevate over his brother Ephraim. The first: “Joseph took the two of them, Ephraim in his right hand to the left of Israel, and Manasseh in his left hand to the right of Israel” (Genesis 48:13). The second: “He supported his father’s hand, to remove it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh” (Genesis 48:17). The third: “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn…” (Genesis 48:18). Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five women from the tribe of Manasseh who took a portion in the land. These were Tzelofḥad’s five daughters, just as it says: “Tzelofḥad’s daughters speak justly; give them a holding for inheritance…” (Numbers 27:7). They were five, as it is stated: “These are the names of his daughters: Maḥla, Noa, Ḥogla, Milka, and Tirtza” (Numbers 27:1). Likewise, Jacob mentioned them in the blessing of Joseph, as it is stated: “Branches [banot] ran atop the wall [alei shur]” (Genesis 49:22); these are Tzelofḥad’s daughters [banot], who received a portion in the land. Alternatively, why were they five each? It corresponds to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “May they proliferate like fish in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16), and fish were created on the fifth day. “This was the offering of Gamliel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Gamliel…”

“In suffering you shall eat of it” – Rav Asi said: Earning a livelihood is twice as difficult as childbirth. Regarding childbirth it is written, “in pain [be’etzev] you shall give birth to children,” whereas regarding earning a livelihood it is written, “in suffering [be’itzavon] you shall eat of it.” (Be’itzavon is an extended form of be’etzev, indicating a greater level of difficulty.) Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman, Rabbi Eliezer said: Redemption is compared to earning a livelihood, and earning a livelihood to redemption, as it is stated: “He rescued us from our foes, for His kindness is forever,” (Psalms 136:24) and adjacent to that: “He gives food to all flesh, for His kindness is forever” (Psalms 136:25). Just as redemption is miraculous, so, too, earning a livelihood is miraculous. Just as earning a livelihood is every day, so, too, redemption is every day. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: It [earning a livelihood] is even greater than redemption, as redemption is carried out through an angel, but livelihood is [directly] through the Holy One blessed be He. Redemption is carried out through an angel, from where is it derived? It is as it is stated: “The angel who redeems me from all evil” (Genesis 48:16). That livelihood is through the Holy One blessed be He? As it is stated: “You open Your hand, and satisfy the desire of every living thing” (Psalms 145:16). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: It [earning a livelihood] is greater than the splitting of the Red Sea, as it is stated: “Who split apart the Red Sea” (Psalms 136:13), and it says: “He gives food to all flesh…” (Psalms 136:25). (Giving food to all flesh is mentioned after the splitting of the Red Sea, indicating that it is greater.)

Rabbi Ḥanina said in the name of Rabbi Pinḥas: It mentions the patriarchs eighteen times in the Torah, and corresponding to it, the Sages instituted the eighteen blessings in prayer. Were a person to say to you: ‘There are nineteen,’ (Nineteen times that the patriarchs are mentioned in the Torah.) say to him: “Behold, the Lord was standing over him […God of Abraham your father, and the God of Isaac]” is not included in the tally. (Because Jacob is not mentioned in the verse.) Were a person to say to you: ‘There are seventeen,’ say to him: “And let my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, be called upon them” (Because although Jacob is not mentioned by name, he is the speaker of this verse and he says: “My name.”) (Genesis 48:16) is one of them. “The land upon which you lie, to you I will give it, and to your descendants” – Rabbi Shimon said in the name of bar Kappara: He folded it like a notepad and placed it under his head, like a person who says: ‘Whatever is under your head is yours.’ Rav Huna said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: Provided that he will be buried there.

“May the angel who redeems me from all evil bless the lads, and let my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, be called upon them, and may they proliferate like fish in the midst of the land” (Genesis 48:16). “May the angel who redeems me from all evil…” – Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥalafta said: Sustenance is twice as difficult as childbirth. Regarding childbirth it is written: “In pain [be’etzev] you will bear children” (Genesis 3:16). Regarding sustenance it is written: “With pain [be’itzavon] (The midrash interprets be’itzavon as the plural of be’etzev.) you will eat of it all the days of your life” (Genesis 3:17). Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman: Rabbi Elazar said: Redemption is juxtaposed to sustenance, (“The God who has shepherded me.… May the angel who redeems me.”) and sustenance is juxtaposed to redemption. (“He delivered us from our foes.… He gives food to all flesh” (Psalms 136:24–25).) Just as redemption is double, (God performed multiple miracles in redeeming Israel.) so too, sustenance is double. Just as sustenance is [provided] every day, so too, redemption [occurs] every day. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: It is greater than redemption, as redemption is by means of an angel and sustenance is by means of the Holy One blessed be He. Redemption is by means of an angel – “may the angel who redeems me”; and sustenance is by means of the Holy One blessed be He – “You open Your hand and satisfy everything living” (Psalms 145:16). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: A person’s sustenance is as difficult as the splitting of the Res Sea, as it is stated: “Who split apart the Red Sea” (Psalms 136:13), and it is written there: “He gives food to all flesh” (Psalms 136:25). “May…bless the lads” – this is Joshua and Gideon. (They were descendants of Ephraim and Manasseh, and angels appeared to them (Joshua 5:14; Judges 6:12).) That is what is written: “It was when Joshua was by Jericho, he lifted his eyes and saw, and behold, a man was standing opposite him.… He said: No, for I am commander of the host of the Lord; now I have come” (Joshua 5:13–14). Rabbi Yehoshua in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak: He cried out from his toenails. (The angel prostrated himself before Joshua, imploring him to accept his help (see Matnot Kehuna; Etz Yosef).) “He said…I am commander of the host of the Lord” – everywhere that I am seen, the Holy One blessed be He is seen. This is a sign: Everywhere that Rabbi Yosei Arokh (Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s attendant. ) was seen, Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] would be seen. “Now I have come” – ‘I came to Moses your master; however, he prayed: “If Your presence does not go, [do not take us up from here]” (Exodus 33:15). (God sent an angel to lead the Israelites into the Land of Israel, but Moses prayed that God’s Presence itself would accompany them, and not the angel. ) I cannot ascend on High, because I have not yet carried out my mission. I cannot remain below, as he was still praying and saying: “If Your presence does not go [do not take us up from here].” Just make certain that you do not do what Moses your master did to me and rejected me.’ “May they proliferate like fish in the midst of the land” – just as the eye does not have dominion over the fish, (The fish are covered by water and are therefore hidden from human sight.) so, the [evil] eye will have no dominion over your descendants. That is what is written: “The children of Joseph spoke to Joshua, [saying: Why did you give me an inheritance of one lot and one portion; and I am a numerous people, as the Lord has blessed me up to now?]” (Joshua 17:14). He said to them: ‘Are you not concerned about the [evil] eye?’ They said to him: ‘This is the blessing that our ancestor blessed us: “May they proliferate like fish in the midst of the land.”’ Just as fish are caught only by their throat, so, your descendants will be caught only by their throat – “They would say to him: Now say: Shibolet, and he would say: Sibolet” (Judges 12:6). (Forty-two thousand men of Ephraim were identified and killed in that manner.) Just as fish grow in water, but when a single drop falls from above they receive it thirstily like one who never tasted the taste of water in all their days, so it is with Israel, they grow in water, in Torah, but when they hear a novel matter of Torah, they receive it thirstily like one who has never heard a matter of Torah in all their days. Rabbi Levi said: The Israelite women conceived six hundred thousand babies in one night, and they were all cast into the Nile; but they ascended by Moses’s merit. That is what Moses says: “Six hundred thousand men on foot [ragli] is the people that I am in their midst” (Numbers 11:21) – all of them ascended by my merit [leragli]. Rabbi Zakkai Rabba cited it from here: “May they proliferate like fish in the midst of the land” – just as in the midst of the land they were six hundred thousand, so, in the milieu of the fish they were six hundred thousand. (Thus, six hundred thousand babies were cast in the Nile, the “milieu of the fish.” ) Just as in the midst of the land they did not die, so in the milieu of the fish they did not die. One whose name is like the name of fish, (Nun means fish in Aramaic, and Joshua the son of Nun led the Israelites into the Land of Israel.) his son will take them into the Land of Israel: “Nun his son, Joshua his son” (I Chronicles 7:27).

R. Jochanan said: "Providential support of man is twice as difficult (wonderful) as the wonders of travail, for while concerning travail it is written (Gen. 3, 16) In pain (singular) shalt thou bring forth (children, concerning support it is written (Ib. ib., 17) In pain (plural) shalt thou eat." R. Jochanan said again: "Providential support of man is much more difficult than the redemption; for at the redemption, it is written (Gen. 48, 16) The angel who redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads, etc., i.e., only an angel is mentioned here, but concerning providential support of man, it is said (Ib.) The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God who fed me from my first being unto this day."

And whence is it derived that they did not change their names? Just as they were called in their descent (to Egypt) — Reuven, Shimon, Levi, and Yehudah (viz. Ibid. 1:2) — so, they were called upon their ascent (viz. Numbers 1:18). And it is written (Genesis 48:16) "The angel who redeems me … and let there be called in them my name and the name of my fathers, etc."

"To split the Sea of Reeds into sections. Ten miracles were performed for our ancestors at the sea. It was split and became like a wall, as it is said (Habakkuk 3:14) 'You pierced with his own spears the head of his warriors.' It was divided into two as it is said (Exodus 14:16) 'And you shall stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it.' It became dry land as it is said (Exodus 15:19) 'And the children of Israel went on dry land.' It became like clay as it is said (Habakkuk 3:15) 'You trampled the sea with your horses, churning the great waters.' It became scattered as it is said (Psalm 74:13) 'You split open the sea by your strength.' It became like rocks as it is said (ibid.) 'You crushed the heads of Leviathan, and gave him as food to the creatures of the desert.' It became divided into sections as it is said, 'To split the Sea of Reeds into sections.' It became mounded up as it is said (Exodus 15:8) 'And by the blast of your nostrils, the waters were piled up.' It became like a flask as it is said 'They stood up like a flask.' (Exodus 15:8) Sweet water came out for them from salty water as it is said (Psalm 78:16) 'And he brought forth streams from a rock.' The water froze in two parts and became like glass balls as it is said (Exodus 15:8) 'The depths congealed in the heart of the sea.' To split the Sea of Reeds into sections. And it is written (Psalm 145:15-16) 'The eyes of all look to you, and you give them their food in due season. You open your hand and satisfy the desire of every living thing.' A mortal king who goes to war cannot feed his soldiers nor supply their needs, but the one who spoke and the world came into being is not so. As it is said (Exodus 15:3) 'The Lord is a warrior; the Lord is his name.' He waged war against Egypt. His name is the One who feeds and sustains all His creatures. As it is said 'To split the Sea of Reeds into sections.' And it is written (Psalm 145:15-16) 'The eyes of all look to you, and you give them their food in due season. You open your hand and satisfy the desire of every living thing.' Rabbi Samuel bar Nahmani said, 'It is difficult to provide sustenance from redemption, for redemption is by means of an agent, as it is said (Genesis 48:16) 'The angel who redeemed me.' But sustenance is provided by the Holy One, blessed be He, as it is said (Psalm 23:1) 'The Lord is my shepherd.'" Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said, "More than the splitting of the Red Sea, it is written (Psalms 136:13) 'who split the Red Sea into parts, for His kindness is eternal,' and it is juxtaposed with (Psalms 145:15) 'The eyes of all look to You with hope, and You give them their food at the proper time.' The school of Elijah taught that once I was traveling from place to place, and I found a man who had a scripture but not a Mishnah in his possession. Rabbi said to me, 'I have one teaching to tell you, but I am afraid you may hold me accountable for it.' I replied, 'Heaven forbid! If you ask me something about the Torah, I will not hesitate to answer.' Rabbi asked me, 'Why is it written, 'You give them their food at the proper time,' and it is also written, 'He gives food to every living creature' (Psalms 136:25)? Does a person not prepare his food for himself?' I answered, 'This is a matter of common decency which one does on his own, and the Holy One, blessed be He, blesses the work of his hands, as it is written (Deuteronomy 14:29), 'so that the Lord your God may bless you in all your undertakings.' Rabbi said to me, 'Could a person sit idle and neglect the study of Torah?' I replied, 'That is the first foolishness that I have heard from you.' Rabbi said to me, 'My son, I will answer you with a parable: go and learn from the fool. When wisdom is taken away from him, he cannot support himself even for an hour. Similarly, when people are deprived of knowledge, they are like animals and birds, and the Holy One, blessed be He, provides sustenance for all living beings.'"

"Shepherd of Israel, listen. Just as the year of redemption sustains [us], so too the year of sustenance brings [us] redemption. And just as sustenance is provided every day, so too redemption comes every day. And just as redemption involves miracles, so too sustenance involves miracles. Rabbi Samuel bar Nachmani said, 'Sustenance is even greater than redemption, for redemption comes through an angel, as it says, "The angel who redeemed me from all harm" [Genesis 48:16], while sustenance comes directly from God, as it says, "God who shepherds me" [Psalms 23:1]." Therefore, Shepherd of Israel, listen and conduct [yourself] like Joseph's flock. Just as Joseph gathered [grain] from the years of plenty for the years of famine, so too gather us from the life of this world to the life of the next. Just as Joseph provided for his brothers according to their deeds, as it says, "Bread according to their children's needs" [Genesis 47:12], so too provide for us according to our deeds. Rabbi Tanhuma said in the name of Rabbi Avin, 'Just as Joseph repaid his brothers' evil deeds with good, so too have we repaid your "evil" deeds, as if we had transgressed your commandments. You have repaid us with good.' Therefore, conduct [yourself] like Joseph's flock."...

"A pig from the forest ran away. This is the king. And Ziz Shaday will graze her, this is Isrteculin. Another thing, a pig from the forest - the letter Ayin is dependent on it. If you have merit, what fish are in the river, the evil eye does not rule over them, as it is said (Genesis 48:16), 'And let them multiply like fish.' So it is with Israel. But if not from the forest of the pig, from the return of the plow, similarly you say (Isaiah 21:1), 'The burden of the desert of the sea.' If it is a sea, why a desert, and if a desert, why a sea? Rather, if you have merit, they are like the creatures of the sea, which as soon as they come up on land, they die immediately. But if not, they are like creatures of the desert. 'Be a desert of the sea.' Another thing, 'the desert of the sea' - these are the non-Jews who are compared to the creatures of the sea. This is what is written (Daniel 7:3), 'Four great beasts came up from the sea.' Rabbi Pinchas and Rabbi Helkiya in the name of Rabbi Simon said, 'The prophet did not explain for the sake of the fourth kingdom but for Moses and Asaph.' Moses said (Leviticus 11:7), 'And the pig, for it has a split hoof.' Just as the pig spreads its hooves and says, 'See that I am pure,' so too do the wicked who steal and rob and commit violence, and appear as if they are true judges. Asaph said, 'A pig from the forest ran away.' Rabbi Pinchas and Rabbi Helkiya in the name of Rabbi Simon said there was an incident with one ruler who judged in one day witches, oath-takers, and murderers. And he said to his advisor, 'I have done three things in one night.' 'Be a pig from the forest.'"...

... Teach us o teacher: toward where should one who prays orient his heart? This is what our Rabbis taught: one should orient his heart toward the place of the Holy of Holies (Berachot 4:5). R’ Eliezer ben Yaakov says: if one is praying outside of the land, he should orient his heart to the land of Israel. If one is praying within the land of Israel, he should orient his heart to Jerusalem. If one is praying in Jerusalem, he should orient his heart to the Holy Temple. If one is praying in the Holy Temple, he should orient his heart to the Holy of Holies. R’ Avin the Levi said: “our neck is like the Tower of David, built as a model (talpiyot)…” (Song of Songs 4:4) What does talpiyot mean? The hill (tel) toward which all turns (peniyot) are directed. And after all this praise, it is written “Open your doors, O Lebanon, and let the fire consume your cedars.” (Zechariah 11:1) And so too they said “He has hurled fire into my bones…” (Lamentations 1:13) Israel said to Him: Master of the World! How long will it be like this? Did You not write in Your Torah “…the one who ignited the fire shall surely pay” (Exodus 22:5)? And You are the one who ignited the fire, as it says “From above He has hurled fire into my bones…” (Lamentations 1:13) You need to rebuild it and to console us, not at the hands of an angel but You in Your glory. The Holy One said to them: by your life, so I will do! As it says “The Lord is the builder of Jerusalem; He will gather the outcasts of Israel.” (Psalms 147:2) And I am the one who consoles you. From where do we learn this? From that which they read in the prophets “I, yea I am He Who consoles you…” (Isaiah 51:12)

“Behold, I am sending an angel” (Exodus 23:20) – the Holy One blessed be He said to Moses: The one who protected the patriarchs will protect the descendants. Likewise, you find with Abraham, when he blessed his son Isaac, he said to him: “The Lord, God of the heavens…He will send His angel before you” (Genesis 24:7). Jacob our patriarch, what did he say to his children? “The angel who redeems me [from all evil]” (Genesis 48:16). He said to them: ‘He redeemed me from Esau, he redeemed me from Laban, he fed me and supported me during the years of famine.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to Moses: ‘Now, too, the one who protected the patriarchs will protect the descendants, as it is stated: “Behold, I am [sending an angel].”’ Every place that an angel is seen, the Divine Presence is seen, as it is stated: “An angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire” (Exodus 3:2), and immediately, “God called to him” (Exodus 3:4). Moreover, when Israel cries out before Him, salvation will come to them. So it was at the bush, as it is stated: “Now, behold, the outcry of the children of Israel has come to Me” (Exodus 3:9). Likewise with Gideon, “An angel [of the Lord] came.… The angel of the Lord appeared to him…” (Judges 6:11–12). (Following this, in verse 13, Gideon complains to the angel about Israel’s oppression at the hands of Midian. The midrash will now cite the angel’s response to Gideon. ) “He said: Go with this strength of yours and save Israel” (Judges 6:14). Likewise, in the future, when he will reveal himself, redemption will come to Israel, as it is stated: “Behold, I am sending My messenger, and he will clear a way before Me” (Malachi 3:1).

Pride is the coin which the Great King, Blessed be He, voided, and about which He warned us in His Torah, as it is said: "Take care lest you forget the Lord your God and fail to keep His commandments" (Deut. 8:11). For the arrogant person forgets his Maker, as it is written, "… and (when) your herds and flocks have multiplied, and your silver and gold have increased, and everything you own has prospered, beware lest your heart grow haughty and you forget the Lord your God … and you say to yourselves, 'My own power and the might of my own hand have won this wealth for me'" (Ibid. 8:13-18). And in the case of a king it is said: "Thus he will not act haughtily towards his fellows or deviate from the Instruction to the right or to the left…" (Ibid. 17:20). If the Torah warned against pride even in the case of a king, so much more does it warn ordinary men that they should not attempt to lord over one another.

And because we see that man is the choicest of the creatures of the Creator in the lower world and that he is perfected in his form and that there is within him the soul that contemplates the secret of the highest heights and of the lowest places and that he is the chief object of all intentions in the world, and that everything that was created in this world, all of it, is for his need. And, in addition to this, there has been given to man a Torah of Truth, to teach him the righteous way, for man is very dear to the Lord, since we see that even the angels serve in supplying the needs of a righteous man as we have found in the case of Abraham, our father and Isaac and Jacob: "The angel who hath redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads" (Gen. 48:16), and "So he strove with an angel, and prevailed" (Hos. 12:5). And Daniel said (Dan. 6:23): "My God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, and they have not hurt me."

Blessed be God, the Mighty, the Wise, the One who is nigh, Responsive, the One, the Eternal, the Primordial, the Creator; greatly exalted be He. Verily, when we look at man who is the best of all the creatures of the Creator, exalted be His majesty, we recognize that he is the object aimed at in the creation of all substances and beings. Furthermore, he is best proportioned, as regards constitution, of all living beings; and, in addition to this, most perfect and most beautiful of form, and most completely fashioned. He possesses a rational soul, elemental, (Horovitz, accepting the Hebrew translation, פנינה would render this "transparent," "luminous" (p. 108, note 65); cf. Dukes ("Phil."," p. 57, note 5).) wise, everlasting, which does not perish with him. For all this there are clear proofs, both intellectual and Scriptural, which every intelligent man knows. The surest proof that man is pre-eminent among creatures is, that he partakes of the state of the angels in regard to speech and understanding. These two are divine and spiritual properties. Nay more, we see, besides this, that the angels busy themselves with the righteous man, as we learn from the case of Abraham, peace be unto him, in that they brought him glad tidings and also warned him; likewise from the case of Isaac and Jacob, our fathers. The latter said in the course of his excellent prayer for his son (Gen. xlviii. 16), "The angel which redeemed me"; (In giving the English of Gabirol's biblical citations, I have quoted as much as is required to elucidate the general context. In doing so, I depart from the precedent laid down by the author or scribe, who frequently cites no more than an initial word or two of the Scriptural passage, sometimes even the non-essential ones, leaving it to the reader to recall the rest. In citing the number of chapter and verse, the Hebrew original has been followed.) and Scripture says of him (Hos. xii. 5), "Yea, he had power over the angel and prevailed"; and Daniel said (vi. 23), "My God hath sent his angel." Concerning the help vouchsafed to the pious and the destruction of their enemies, it is said (II Kings xix. 35), "And it came to pass that night that the angel of the Lord went out and smote in the camp of the Assyrians." There are many similar examples, which I will not go to the length of enumerating.

Verse :"Fish" Commentary :"The term 'fish' is used metaphorically, as in 'and they shall multiply' (Genesis 48:16), regarding the cucumbers and watermelons. Now it explains why they asked about these species. As for meat, there is no need to give a reason why they asked, for it is a desirable food. However, regarding these species, it explains why they asked, saying, 'We see nothing but the manna before our eyes, and we have no satisfaction with it.' This is similar to the taste of fine oil, which is refined and boiled. In the portion of Beshalach, Pharaoh said, 'It is like honeycomb dipped in honey.' This refers to when it is not cooked. Both cooked and uncooked honey are sweet and require a condiment, as is done with meat using mustard and garlic. Therefore, they asked about onions and garlic. All these things are only the evil inclination, for even regarding these matters, since they do not produce anything for eating or clothing, as it is written, 'Your garments did not wear out on you' (Deuteronomy 29:4). But a light matter, for they had silver, gold, and abundant livestock. Even something that comes down from heaven does not require seasoning, for God does not produce anything that is not perfected. And there is no pleasure in the world like the manna, and the manna descends from heaven."

Along these lines, see the Midrash Rabbah, Genesis section 97, where it states [pertaining to the verse], “May they proliferate abundantly like the fish within the land” (Gen. 48:16): Just as with fish raised in water, if water falls from above, they accept that water as thirstily as if they had never tasted water in their entire lives – so it is with Israel, who is raised on the water of Torah. If they hear a novel Torah law, they accept it with great thirst as if they had never heard a word of Torah in their lives.

וַיּוֹצִאֵ֤נוּ יְהֹוָה֙ מִמִּצְרַ֔יִם בְּיָ֤ד חֲזָקָה֙ וּבִזְרֹ֣עַ נְטוּיָ֔ה וּבְמֹרָ֖א גָּדֹ֑ל וּבְאֹת֖וֹת וּבְמֹפְתִֽים׃ Adonai freed us from Egypt by a mighty hand, by an outstretched arm and awesome power, and by signs and portents. (Deut. 26:8) וַיּוֹצִאֵ֤נוּ יְהֹוָה֙ מִמִּצְרַ֔יִם Vayoteinu, “Adonai took us out from Egypt,” (Deut. 26:8) Since a verse states, “God sent a messenger (malakh) and took us out from Egypt,” (Num. 20:16) the commentators state that this verse is speaking of Moses, our teacher. Because the prophets are emissaries of God, they are considered, מַלְאָכִים֙ malakhim (angels). The Maggid comes to say that this is not that type of מַלְאָכִים֙, malakh, nor is it the type of malakh, our forefather, Jacob, was referring to when he said, “The angel who has redeemed me from all harm…” (Gen. 48:16) Jacob is not referring to an angel among the ministering angels for he would never have said that an angel should bless his grandchildren. Rather the termהַמַּלְאָךְ֩ hamalakh, “the Angel,” refers to the Shechinah, the Divine Presence and that God Himself took them out of Egypt. One might say that these verses contradict one another! One says that God “Sent an angel to take us out…” (Num. 20:16) and the other verse says “ Adonai took us out…” (Deut. 26:8) and yet Maggid says, “Not by an angel…” However one should note that the verse does not say, “He sent an angel to take us out,” but rather, “He sent an angel and He took us out.” (Num. 20:16) He wishes to explain that God had already sent, “the angel of His presence,” (This is another term for the Shechinah.) (Is. 63:9) to Egypt. This is what the sages meant when they stated, “The Divine Presence (Shechinah) was exiled to Egypt with them, as is stated, “I Myself will go down with you to Egypt, and I Myself will also bring you back.” (Gen. 46:4) This suggests that God will bring us out of Egypt through Shechinah itself and will perform miracles and wonders. This is what will happen in the future when God brings us out from this exile, as is written, “In that day, I will set up again the fallen booth of David,” (Amos 9:11) Therefore, it won’t be through a שָׂרָף Saraph, a fiery being, even though it is written, “I will bore you on the wings of eagles.” (Ex. 19:4) This refers to the face of the eagle in the divine chariot, (Ez. 1:1) It was not the Sarafim who took us out completely; rather it was God who took us out of Egypt and these eagles served to carry us to the land of Israel so we could eat the Passover offering, as the liturgist wrote, “They built and flew off to the bright and fairest of heritages… There they shall eat the Pesach offering with praise and songs, This is because outside of the land of Israel the Pesach offering was not allowed. On that night they shall return to the Valley of Kaftorim. I will perform miracles with all the gods of Egypt, I and not an emissary, The emissary is Moses who was sent on a mission by the Blessed One to Pharaoh and to the people of Israel, and not as the people who complained said, “Why have you brought us up out of Egypt?” It was not so - rather it was God who brought us out, and against all the Gods of Egypt did he bring judgment.

You also need to know that the apparently strange phenomenon in this paragraph, i.e. that G’d is the one who subjects Avraham to the trial whereas the angel prevented him from going through with it, needs to be understood as follows: The “angel” mentioned in our paragraph is not of the category of the נפרדים, ”disembodied spiritual creatures,” but it belonged to what are known as the נטיעות, “the emanations of G’d.” [a divine voice much closer to G’d’s Essence than “mere” angels. Ed.] Had the angel who called out to Avraham and instructed him to desist belonged to the category known as נפרדים, Avraham would have ignored him, would not have allowed himself to be countermanded by a subordinate of the One who had instructed him in the first place. Moreover, it is quite unthinkable that an angel of the “lower” category נפרדים would have been allowed to say to Avraham ולא חשכת את בנך ממני, “and you did not withhold your son from Me.” He would have had to say: “you have not withheld your son from Him.” All of this proves that the voice which the Torah describes as emanating from an “angel of G’d,” was of a superior divine level. This “angel” is also known as the “great angel,” who manifested himself in Exodus 14,19 when the Torah describes him as traveling in front of the encampment of the Jewish people (performing all kinds of miracles). The words מלאך האלו-הים employed there by the Torah do not mean “angel of the Lord,” i.e the word מלאך is not a possessive clause, the angel being merely an attribute of G’d. The word האלו-הים in that verse must be understood as an explanation of the word מלאך. When the Torah describes this divine emanation as מלאך, the meaning is that G’d is “contained, present,” within this divine emanation. We encounter something similar in Exodus 23,21 where G’d explains to Moses that the מלאך who will be accompanying the Jewish people needs to be related to with the utmost reverence as “My Name is within him.” Apparently, the word substituted for this attribute of G’d we called פחד יצחק, an attribute which brooks no defiance of any sort. When we read in Genesis 48,16 when Yaakov blesses before his death המלאך הגואל אותי....בקרב הארץ “the angel who has rescued me, etc. etc. is in the midst of the terrestrial world,” this is an allusion to the אדנות, the attribute of “mastery” which this “angel” represents. He has authority בקרב הארץ within the whole terrestrial universe. Seeing that this attribute contains also the element of mercy, “He” suddenly describes Himself as י-ה-ו-ה when He says 'בי נשבעתי נאום ה “I have sworn by Myself says Hashem, i.e. the attribute of Mercy, etc.” Up until this moment the attribute mentioned in this chapter had only been the attribute אלו-קים, i.e. G’d manifesting Himself as the attribute of Justice. Whereas before the binding Avraham had spoken of אלוקים יראה לו השה, that the G’d known as elokim would select the lamb for Himself, after the episode Avraham begins to view this elokim as Hashem when he said בהר ה' יראה, “at the mountain of the (merciful) G’d He may be seen (experienced).” At that time this attribute promises Avraham that He would bless his descendants making them numerous and bestowing powerful blessings on them. The repetition of the words ברך אברכך and הרבה ארבה are proof that these blessings will be more numerous and more powerful than ordinary blessings.

You have to appreciate that the meaning of the word בקרבי is derived from קרב, “battle;” its numerical value is the same as that of שדי, i.e. 314. In other words, when this attribute of G’d withdrew the Jewish people lost the battle. I believe that wherever we find the word בקרב or similar in the Torah there is an allusion in that word to the “awakening” of the attribute of Justice. The root of all this is to be found in Exodus 23,21 כי שמי בקרבו, “for My name is within it” [the angel representing the attribute of Justice]. Other examples are: Genesis 48,16 וידגו לרוב בקרב הארץ, “may they proliferate abundantly like fish, in the midst of the land.” The beginning of that verse referred to the המלאך הגואל אותי מכל רע, “the angel who has redeemed me from all harmful influences,” a clear reference to the attribute of Justice. Other verses in which the word בקרב is clearly indicative of an association with the attribute of Justice are: Exodus 10,1 למען שתי אותותי אלה בקרבו, as well as Exodus 8,18: כי אני ה' בקרב הארץ, or Deut. 15,11: כי לא יחדל אביון מקרב הארץ, “there will not cease to be someone who is destitute in the midst of the land.” The author extends the list; [I will omit further examples in the interest of brevity. Ed.]

ואפו עשר נשים, “and ten women will bake (in one oven).” This number is not to be understood literally, but is an example of an unusually large number, not appropriate for the subject under discussion. We find an example of this in Job 19,3 where he said: “you humiliate me ten times.” It means that Job complained about being humiliated time and again. The reason the number “ten” is used to illustrate such concepts of something occurring frequently is because this number is the conclusion of a number of digits which are all included in it. The number “seven” has similar properties as it includes all the days of the week, a recurring phenomenon. When Solomon writes in Proverbs 24,16 that a righteous person can fall seven times and recover, this does not mean that he cannot recover an eighth time, but that he can recover after having fallen many times. The Torah describes Yaakov as prostrating himself before his brother Esau “seven times” in Genesis 33,3. The number “seven” need not be understood literally but is a metaphor for “many times.” The reason that that number has become the symbol of “many times” may be that the only sequential combination of letters in the aleph bet which produces the number seven are the letters ג and ד, a combination of these two numbers as letters yields the word דג, fish, a species whose rate of multiplying is described as ישרצו, in Genesis 1,20 as “the waters shall teem with fish.” Yaakov applied this to human beings also when he blessed Joseph’s children wishing וידגו לרב בקרב הארץ, “may they increase abundantly as fish,” in Genesis 48,16. We may therefore view both the number seven and the number ten as metaphors for large numbers of something.

יושב בקרבו, compare the verses 36 in our chapter as well as Genesis 48,16 where one or the other of these words is used to describe the environment in which our patriarchs lived.

BEHOLD, I SEND AN ANGEL BEFORE THEE. “Here they were informed that they would sin [by worshipping the golden calf] and that the Divine Glory would be saying to them, For I will not go up in the midst of thee. (Further, 33:3.)

FOR NOW I KNOW THAT THOU ART A G-D FEARING MAN. At the beginning Abraham’s fear of G-d was latent; it had not become actualized through such a great deed. But now it was known in actuality, and his merit was perfect, and his reward would be complete from the Eternal, the G-d of Israel. (See Ruth 2:12.) The doctrine of this chapter which teaches that G-d is the One who tries Abraham and commands him about the binding of Isaac, and it is the angel of G-d who restrains and promises him, will be explained in the verse, The angel who hath redeemed me. (Further, 48:16.)

I AM THE G-D OF BETH-EL. Jacob related to his wives all that G-d’s angel had told him in the dream, all this serving to persuade them to go with him. However, what he told did not consist of one dream. The statement, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the he-goats (Verse 12 here.) was made to him when he served Laban for his flock, at the time the flock conceived (Verse 10 here.) in one of the first years. (One of the first of the six years he served for the sheep. See further, 31:41.) The statement, I am the G-d of Beth-el was made to him after that, at the time of the journey, for after He said to him, Now arise, get thee out from this land, (In Verse 13 here.) he no longer remained in Haran to further tend Laban’s flocks so that the he-goats would mount the flocks and the flocks would give birth to speckled and spotted. But on the morrow of the dream, he sent for Rachel and Leah and told them his dream, and they left Haran. I am ‘ha’e-il’ (the G-d) of Beth-el. The meaning thereof is, as Rashi explained it, that the letter hei in ha’e-il is redundant and is the same as if it were written: “I am e-il Beth-el (the G-d of Beth-el).” Similarly, To ‘ha’aretz’ (the land) of Canaan; (Numbers 34:2.) [the hei is redundant and is the same as if it were written: “to eretz Canaan (the land of Canaan).”] Grammarians (Ibn Ezra and R’dak.) adjusted it by saying that it is as if it were written, “I am the G-d, who is the G-d of Beth-el.” Similarly, And the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, (Above, 2:9.) [which is as if it said: “and the tree of the knowledge, namely the knowledge of good and evil”]; the cords of gold, (Numbers 39:17.) [which is as if it said, “the cords, which are cords of gold]. And the angel here speaks in the name of He Who sent him, [therefore, he speaks in the first person and says, “I am, etc.”] ….

The scene is evocative, especially in Joseph’s surprising defense of the usually maligned firstborn. On one level, it seems to indicate a particularly close relationship between Joseph and Manasseh. The midrash certainly painted a consistent portrait of Manasseh as Joseph’s right-hand man, steward of his house, his shamash [minister]. (Targum Yerushalmi, Genesis 48:16; Tan. B. Miketz 13.) Joseph groomed Manasseh in his likeness. When Joseph’s brothers descended to Egypt in search of food, it was Manasseh’s qualities that first alerted the brothers – who were unmindfully interacting with Joseph and his supposed steward – that something was amiss:

זכרנו את הדגה אשר נאכל, “we remember the fish we used to eat, etc.” Nachmanides understands these words literally, pointing out that the Egyptian fishermen would employ the Jews and would let them eat the fish they did not think they could sell at the local fish market. The various vegetables mentioned in our verse were so plentiful in Egypt that even Hebrew slaves could afford them, or that they dug them out of the ground and no one would protest this. We have the Torah on record as comparing the whole of the land of Egypt to a garden full of greens. (Genesis 13,10) [The author paints one or two additional scenarios that would explain the words in our text. They are of speculative character. Ed.] Some commentators do not understand the word דגה as fish at all, but view it as a simile describing abundance, as in Genesis 48,16 וידגו לרוב בקרב הארץ, “may they proliferate abundantly.” Accordingly, the people would have been complaining about the abundant sources of food they had enjoyed in Egypt and the variety, compared to what they condescendingly described as the monotonous diet of manna.

In your letter you mention that the apostle has spurred on a number of people to believe that several verses in Scripture allude to the Madman, such as "bimeod meod"5 (Genesis 17:20), "he shined forth from Mount Paran"6 (Deuteronomy 33:1), "a prophet from the midst of thee" (Deuteronomy 18:15), and the promise to Ishmael "I will make him a great nation" (Genesis 17:20). These arguments have been rehearsed so often that they have become nauseating. It is not enough to declare that they are altogether feeble; nay, to cite as proofs these verses is ridiculous and absurd in the extreme. For these are not matters that can confuse the minds of anyone. Neither the untutored multitude nor the apostates themselves who delude others with them, believe in them or entertain any illusions about them. Their purpose in citing these verses is to win favor in the eyes of the Gentiles by demonstrating that they believe the statement of the Koran that Mohammed was mentioned in the Torah. But the Muslims themselves put no faith in their own arguments, they neither accept nor cite them, because they are manifestly so fallacious. Inasmuch as the Muslims could not find a single proof in the entire Bible nor a reference or possible allusion to their prophet which they could utilize, they were compelled to accuse us saying, "You have altered the text of the Torah, and expunged every trace of the name of Mohammed therefrom." They could find nothing stronger than this ignominious argument the falsity of which is easily demonstrated to one and all by the following facts. First, Scripture was translated into Syriac, Greek, Persian and Latin hundreds of years before the appearance of Mohammed. Secondly, there is a uniform tradition as to the text of the Bible both in the East and the West, with the result that no differences in the text exist at all, not even in the vocalization, for they are all correct. Nor do any differences effecting the meaning exist. The motive for their accusation lies therefore, in the absence of any allusion to Mohammed in the Torah. The phrase "a great nation" cited above does not connote a people in possession of prophecy or a Law, but merely one large in numbers just as in reference to idolaters Scripture says "nations greater and mightier than yourselves." (Deuteronomy 11:23). Similarly, the phrase "bimeod meod" simply signifies "exceedingly." Were there any allusion in the verse to Mohammed, then it would have read "and I shall bless him bimeod meod," and whoever likes to hang on to a spider's web might then discover a reference to Mohammed therein. As it is, since Scripture says "I shall increase him bimeod meod," it can only denote an extravagant increment in numbers. There is no question that the Divine assurance to Abraham to bless his descendants, to reveal the Torah to them, and to make them the Chosen People, refers only to the offspring of Isaac. For Ishmael is mentioned as an adjunct and appendage in the blessing of Isaac, which reads "and also of the son of the bond-woman will I make a nation." (Genesis 21:13). This verse suggests that Isaac holds a primary position and Ishmael a subordinate place. This point is made even more explicit in the blessing which ignores Ishmael entirely. "For in Isaac shall seed be called in thee." (Genesis 21:12). The meaning of God's promise to Abraham is that the issue of Ishmael will be vast in numbers but neither pre-eminent nor the object of divine favor, nor distinguished for the attainment of excellence. Not because of them will Abraham be famed or celebrated, but by the noted and illustrious scions of Isaac. The phrase "shall be called" simply means, shall be renowned, as it does in the verse, "Let thy name be called in them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac." (Genesis 48:16). Other verses also indicate that when God promised Abraham that His law would be vouchsafed to his children as is implied in the words "And I will be their God" (Genesis 17:8), He meant Isaac to the exclusion of Ishmael as is intimated in the declaration "But My covenant will I establish with Isaac" (Genesis 17:21), although He had already conferred His favor upon Ishmael when He said "Behold I have blessed him" (Genesis 17:20). Similarly, Isaac by bestowing the blessing of Abraham upon Jacob exclusively, debarred Esau from it, as we read in his benediction "And may He give you the blessing of Abraham" (Genesis 28:4). To sum up, the Divine covenant made with Abraham to grant the sublime Law to his descendants referred exclusively to those who belonged to the stock of both Isaac and Jacob. Hence the prophet expresses his gratitude to God for "the covenant which He made with Abraham, and His oath unto Isaac, which He established unto Jacob for a statute, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant." (Psalms 105:9, I Chronicles 16:16). It is also to be noted that the name of the Arabian prophet which the Mahommedans believe to be mentioned in the Torah, by way of allusion, which the Jewish apostates find in the phrase "bimeod meod," is A.H.M.D. and not M.H.M.D. So it is explicitly stated in the Koran: "They find him mentioned in the Torah and the Gospels (Sura 7:156); his name is Ahmad." But the numerical value7 of the latter is not equal to that of the words "bimeod meod" which is supposed to contain an allusion to the prophet of Islam. The argument from the phrase "He shined forth from Mount Paran" (Deuteronomy 33:2) is easily refutable. Shined is past tense. Had Scripture employed the future tense "he will shine forth from Mount Paran" then the imposters might have had a semblance of truth on their side. However the use of the past tense "he shined forth" demonstrates that this phrase describes an event that has taken place, namely the theophany on Sinai. When the Deity was about to reveal Himself on Sinai, the heavenly light did not descend suddenly like a thunder-bolt, but came down gently, manifesting itself gradually first from the top of one mountain, then from another, until He reached His abode on Sinai. This notion is implied in the verse "The Lord revealed himself at Sinai, after His light had radiated to them from Seir and glimmered from Mount Paran." (Deuteronomy 33:2). Mark well, that the phrase "unto them" refers to Israel. Note also how Scripture indicates the various gradations in the intensity of the Divine Splendor. It speaks of the light that glimmered from Mount Paran which is further removed from Sinai, but of the light that radiated from Mount Seir, which is nearer to it, and finally of the revelation of the full splendor of God on Sinai which was the goal of the theophany as is related in the verse "And the glory of God abode on Mount Sinai" (Exodus 24:16), "and the Lord came from Sinai". (Deuteronomy 33:2). Similarly, the idea that the light descended gradually from mountain to mountain is conveyed in Deborah's description of the grandeur of Israel at the Revelation on Sinai when she exclaimed "Lord when Thou didst go forth out of Seir, when Thou didst march out of the field of Edom" (Judges 5:4). Our sages of blessed memory, tell us that God, may He be praised and exalted, charged a prophet before the time of Moses to go to the Romans and another to go to the Arabs with the purpose of presenting them the Torah, but each of them in turn spurned it. When Moses was later sent to us we signified our acceptance in the words "All that the Lord hath spoken will we do, and obey" (Exodus 24:7). The aforementioned event happened before the Sinaitic Revelation, consequently Scripture speaks in the past tense: "He came, radiated forth, and shone," which proves that no prophecy is intended in these words." You write in your letter, that some people were duped by the argument that Mohammed is alluded to in the verse "A prophet will the Lord thy God raise up unto thee, from the midst of thee, of thy brethren" (Deuteronomy 18:15), while others remained unconvinced because of the phrase "from the midst of thee." It is most astonishing that some folks should be deluded by such specious proof, while others were almost persuaded, were it not for the phrase "from the midst of thee." Under these circumstance it is incumbent upon you to concentrate and understand my view in the matter. Remember that it is not right to take a passage out of its context and to draw inferences from it. It is imperative to take into consideration the preceding and following statements in order to fathom the writer's meaning and purpose before making any deductions. Were it otherwise, then it would be possible to assert that Scripture has prohibited obedience to any prophet, and interdicted belief in miracles, by quoting the verse, "Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet," (Deuteronomy 13:4). It could likewise be affirmed that a positive command exists requiring us to worship idols, by citing the verse "And ye shall serve other gods" (Deuteronomy 11:16). Other illustrations could be multiplied ad libidinem. To sum up, it is wrong to interpret any given verse apart from its context. In order to comprehend unequivocally the verse under discussion namely, "A prophet will the Lord thy God raise up unto thee, from the midst of thee, of thy brethren," it is necessary to ascertain its context. The beginning of the paragraph whence the verse is taken, contains prohibitions of the acts of soothsaying, augury, divination, astrology, sorcery, incantation and the like. The Gentiles believe that through these practices they can predict the future course of events and take the necessary precautions to forestall them. The interdiction of these occult proceedings were accompanied with the explanation that the Gentiles believe they can depend upon them to determine future happenings. But you may not do so. You will learn about the time to come from a prophet who will rise up among you, whose predictions will come true without fail. You will thus arrive at a foreknowledge of circumstances without being obliged to resort to augury, divination, astrology and the like, for he will spare you that. Matters will be facilitated for you by the fact that this prophet will live within your borders. You will not be compelled to go in search after him from country to country, nor to travel to distant parts, as is implied in the phrase, "from the midst of thee." Moreover, another notion is conveyed in the words "from the midst of thee from thy brethren like unto me," namely, that he will be one of you, that is, a Jew. The obvious deduction is that you shall be distinguished above all others for the sole possession of prophecy. The words "like unto me" were specifically added to indicate that only the descendants of Jacob are meant. For the phrase "of thy brethren" by itself might have been misunderstood and taken to refer also to Esau and Ishmael, since we do find Israel addressing Esau as brother, for example, in the verse, "Thus saith thy brother Israel" (Numbers 20:14). On the other hand, the words "like unto me," do not denote a prophet as great as Moses, for this interpretation is precluded by the statement "And there hath not arisen a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses." (Deuteronomy 34:10). The general drift of the chapter points to the correctness of our interpretation and will be confirmed by the succession of the verses, to wit "There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire etc.," (Deuteronomy 18:10), "For these nations, that thou art to dispossess, hearken unto soothsayers, and unto diviners; but as for thee, the Lord thy God hath not suffered thee so to do ." (Verse 14). "A prophet will the Lord why [sic] God raise up unto thee, from the midst of thee, of they brethren, like unto me," (Verse 15). It is obviously clear that the prophet alluded to here will not be a person who will produce a new law, or found a new religion. He will merely enable us to dispense with diviners and astrologers, and will be available for consultation concerning anything that may befall us, just as the Gentiles confer with soothsayers and prognosticators. Thus we find Saul advising with Samuel concerning his lost asses, as we read, "Beforetime in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, thus he said: 'Come and let us go to the seer'; for he that is now called a prophet was beforetime called a seer." (Samuel 9:9). Our disbelief in the prophecy of Omar and Zeid8 is not due to the fact that they are non-Jews, as the unlettered folk imagine, and in consequence of which they are compelled to justify their standpoint by the Biblical statement "from thy midst, out of thy brethren." For Job, Zophar, Bildad, Eliphaz, and Elihu are all considered prophets and are non-Jews. On the other hand, although Hananiah, the son of Azur was a Jew, he was deemed an accursed and false prophet. Whether one should yield credence to a prophet or not depends upon the nature of his doctrines, and not upon his race, as we shall explain presently. Our ancestors have witnessed Moses, our Teacher, foremost among the prophets, holding a colloquy with the Divinity, reposed implicit faith in him when they said to him, "Go thou near and hear," (Deuteronomy 5:24). Now he assured us that no other law remained in heaven that would subsequently be revealed, nor would there even be another Divine dispensation, as the verse, "It is not in heaven," (Deuteronomy 30:12) implies. Scripture prohibits us from making any amendments to the Law or eliminating anything, for we read "Thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it" (Deuteronomy 13:1). We pledged and obligated ourselves to God to abide by His Law, we, our children, and our children's children, until the end of time as Scripture says "The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever." (Deuteronomy 29:28). Any prophet, therefore, no matter what his pedigree is, be he priest, Levite, or Amalekite, is perfidious even if he asserts that only one of the precepts of the Torah is void, in view of the Mosaic pronouncement "unto us and unto our children forever." Such a one we would declare a false prophet and would execute him if we had jurisdiction over him. We would take no notice of the miracles that he might perform, just as we would disregard the wonder-working of one who seeks to lure people to idolatry, as we are enjoined in the verse "And the sign or wonder came to pass ... thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet" (Deuteronomy 13:3). Since Moses, of blessed memory, has prohibited image worship for all the time, we know that the miracles of a would-be-seducer to idolatry are wrought by trickery and sorcery, Similarly, since Moses has taught us that the Law is eternal, we stamp definitely as a prevaricator any one who argues that it was destined to be in force for a fixed duration of time, because he contravenes Moses. Consequently we pay no attention to his assertions or supernatural performances. Inasmuch as we do not believe in Moses because of his miracles, we are under no obligations to institute comparison between his miracles and those of others. Our everlastingly firm trust and steadfast faith in Moses is due to the fact that our forebears as well as he, had heard the Divine discourse on Sinai, as it is intimated in the Scripture, "and they will also believe thee forever" (Exodus 19:9). This event is analogous to the situation of two witnesses who observed a certain act simultaneously. Each of them saw what his fellow saw and each of them is sure of the truth of the statement of his fellow, and does not require proof or demonstration, whereas other people, to whom they would report their testimony, would not be convinced without confirmation or certification. Similarly, we of the Jewish faith, are convinced of the truth of the prophecy of Moses, inasmuch as our ancestors in common with him witnessed the Divine revelation on Sinai, and not merely because of his miracles.9 He performed all of these only as the occasion demanded and as is recorded in Scripture. We do not give credence to the tenets of a miracle worker, in the same way we trust in the truth of Moses our Teacher, nor does any analogy exist between them. This distinction is a fundamental principle of our religion, but seems to have fallen into oblivion, and has been disregarded by our co-religionists. This thought was present in the mind of Solomon when he addressed the Gentiles in behalf of Israel, "What will you see in the Shulamite? as it were a dance of two companies." (Song of Songs 7:1). The verse means to say, "If you can produce anything like the revelation on Sinai then we shall concede some misgivings concerning Moses." If a Jewish or Gentile prophet urges and encourages people to follow the religion of Moses without adding thereto or diminishing therefrom, like Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the others, we demand a miracle from him. If he can perform it we recognize him and bestow upon him the honor due to a prophet, but if he fails to do so, he is put to death. We require only a miracle as his credentials, although it may be wrought by stratagem or magic, just as we accept the evidence of witnesses although there is a possibility of perjury. For we are divinely commanded through Moses to render judgment in a suit at law in accordance with the testimony of two witnesses, the possibility of false swearing notwithstanding. Similarly we are enjoined to yield obedience to one who asserts that he is a prophet provided he can substantiate his claims by miracle or proofs, although there is a possibility that he is an impostor. However, if the would-be-prophet teaches tenets that negate the doctrines of Moses, then we must repudiate him. This point was made abundantly clear in the introduction to our large work on the commentary of the Mishnah, where you will find some useful information concerning principles which form the foundation of our religion, and the pillars of our faith. It is incumbent upon you to know that the rule that nothing may ever be added to or diminished from the Laws of Moses, applies equally to the oral law, that is the traditional interpretation transmitted through the sages of blessed memory. Be cautious and on your guard lest any of the heretics, may they speedily perish! mingle among you, for they are worse than apostates. For although this country is, as you know, a place of scholars, students and schools, they indulge in bombastic talk and we warn our people against their occasional errors, heresies and mistakes. As for you, in this distant country, although you are scholars, learned in the law, and pious, you are few in number, may God increase your number and hasten the time of gathering you all together. If any of the heretics rises up to corrupt the people, they will undermine the faith of the young folks and they will not find a savior. Beware of them and know that it is permitted to slay them in our opinion for they repudiate the statement in the prophecy of Moses who commanded us to act "According to the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee thou shalt do." (Deuteronomy 17:11). They assert in wicked defiance that they believe most firmly in the prophecy of Moses, as the Arabs and Byzantines say, yet they destroy and nullify his law and kill the adherents thereof. Whoever joins them is just like his seducer. We deemed it imperative to call your attention to these facts, and to raise the young generation on these tenets, because they are a pillar of faith!

Did Rabbi Emden have the practice of only blessing the sons and not the daughters? That is unlikely. From that which he wrote, "to bless the children," and not, "the sons," it appears that they would bless the sons and daughters alike with the same blessing of Jacob, "May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh." And that is what is implied in Scripture: By you shall Israel invoke blessings (Genesis 48:20) — that the blessing is for all of Israel.

According to Philo, it is not explicitly stated "the way of God," but rather "his way," since this refers to the degradation of humanity, the name of God is not mentioned in the text. This is his method in several places, where the Lord does not mention His name regarding evil, and He does not share His name on punishments and curses, as stated in "On the Confusion of Tongues" and "On Migration and Encounter". Even though Philo has a few instances where God punishes directly and not through an agent, as seen in "On the Life of Moses" I, 97 and Exodus 12:23, and in the response to Exodus I, 23, and as mentioned earlier in Genesis 3:22, and the commentary on Genesis I, 55, this method is really like the method of Rabbi Yochanan: "Rabbi Eliezer ben Pedat said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan, the name of God is not mentioned regarding evil, only regarding good. Know that this is so, when God created light and darkness and called them names, He mentioned His name regarding light and did not mention His name regarding darkness, as it is said (Genesis 1:5), "And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night." Similarly, when He created Adam and Eve, He mentioned His name on them." As it is said (Genesis 48:16), "And may God bless them," and when he cursed them, he did not mention His name upon them, etc. The Holy One, blessed be He, did not wish to perform the evil Himself, but rather through an angel (Talmud Bavli, Tazria 12). See also Genesis 19:12-13; Exodus 12:23 and in the commentary of Rabbi Hayyim ben Attar. "From this we learn that the Torah's ways are ways of pleasantness and all its paths are peace. Therefore, the Holy One, blessed be He, will bring punishment without mentioning His name. Similarly, when it says 'and He destroyed all living things,' it does not say 'and God destroyed all living things'" (Rabbi Hayyim ben Attar, Genesis 7:11). Further examples can be found in his commentary.

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said that a proof for the notion that the evil eye holds no sway over Joseph and his descendants, is from here, Jacob’s blessing of Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Manasseh: “The angel who has redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named in them, and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude [veyidgu] in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16). Veyidgu is related etymologically to the word for fish [dag]. Just as with regard to the fish in the sea, water covers them and the evil eye has no dominion over them, so too, the seed of Joseph, the evil eye has no dominion over them.

Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said that this idea is derived from here: “And let them grow [veyidgu] into a multitude in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16). Just as with regard to fish [dagim] in the sea, the water covers them and the evil eye therefore has no dominion over them, as they are not seen, so too, with regard to the offspring of Joseph, the evil eye has no dominion over them.

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, cited a different proof, from Jacob’s blessing of Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Menashe: “The angel who redeems me from all evil shall bless the young and in them may my name be recalled, and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, and may they multiply [veyidgu] in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16). Veyidgu is related etymologically to the word fish [dag]. Just as the fish in the sea, water covers them and the evil eye has no dominion over them, so too the seed of Joseph, the evil eye has no dominion over them.

Another began and said: One who enters a city and fears the evil eye should hold the thumb [zekafa] of his right hand in his left hand and the thumb of his left hand in his right hand and recite the following: I, so-and-so son of so-and-so, come from the descendants of Joseph, over whom the evil eye has no dominion, as it is stated: “Joseph is a fruitful vine, a fruitful vine by a fountain [alei ayin]; its branches run over the wall” (Genesis 49:22). Do not read it as alei ayin; but rather, read it as olei ayin, who rise above the eye and the evil eye has no dominion over him. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Derive it from here, from what is stated in Jacob’s blessing of Joseph’s sons: “And let them grow like fish into a multitude in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16): Just as fish in the sea are covered by water and the evil eye has no dominion over them as they cannot be seen, so too the offspring of Joseph, the evil eye has no dominion over them. And if he is concerned about his own evil eye, lest it damage others, he should look at the side of his left nostril.

Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Phineas: Corresponding to the eighteen times the Patriarchs are mentioned together in the Torah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob. If somebody will tell you that there are nineteen, tell him that (Gen. 23:13) “Behold, the Eternal was standing over him” is not counted (Since Jacob is not mentioned in that verse.) . If somebody will tell you that there are seventeen, tell him that (Gen. 48:16) “My name should be called over them, as well the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac” is counted (Since Jacob is mentioned implicitly; he speaks about “my name”.) .

Rebbi Ḥanania in the name of Rebbi Phineas: Corresponding to the eighteen times the Patriarchs are mentioned together in the Torah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob. If somebody will tell you that there are nineteen, tell him that Behold, the Eternal was standing on it (Gen. 23:13. In this verse Jacob is not mentioned by name.) is not counted. If somebody will tell you that there are seventeen, tell him that My name should be called over them, as well the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac (Gen. 48:16. Jacob’s name is mentioned implicitly.) is counted.

There are Tannaim who state that ḥalîṣah is shameful; there are Tannaim who state that ḥalîṣah is praiseworthy. Rav Ḥisda said, he who says that ḥalîṣah is shameful follows the early Mishnah, that ḥalîṣah is praiseworthy follows the late Mishnah (Mishnah Bekhorot 1:7: “The obligation of levirate has precedence over ḥalîṣah. That was in earlier times, when people had the intent to fulfill the commandment, but now, when people do not have the intent to fulfill the commandment (but to enjoy the marriage) they said, the obligation of ḥalîṣah has precedence over levirate.”) . Rebbi Yose said, you might even say, in both cases one follows the early Mishnah, or in both cases one follows the late Mishnah. He who says that ḥalîṣah is shameful, since he damaged one thing in the Torah he shall come and take his damage: “his house shall be called in Israel the house of the one stripped of shoe. (Deut. 25:9.) ” He who says that ḥalîṣah is praiseworthy, it mentions here “calling” and it is said there: “My name will be called about them (Gen. 48:16. This verse is a blessing.) ”. Since “calling” there is a praise, so here it is a praise.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The task of providing a person’s food is more difficult than the redemption. While, with regard to the redemption, it is written: “The angel who has redeemed me from all evil” (Genesis 48:16), indicating that a mere angel is sufficient to protect a person from all evil; whereas, with regard to sustenance, it is written: “The God who has been my shepherd all my life long to this day” (Genesis 48:15). This verse implies that only God can help one who is struggling to earn a living.

The Gemara cites an alternative source for the assertion that the evil eye holds no sway over Joseph and his descendants: Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said that it is derived from here: Jacob blessed Joseph’s children and said: “And let them grow [veyidgu] into a multitude in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16). Just as with regard to fish [dagim] in the sea, waters cover them and the evil eye therefore has no dominion over them, so too, with regard to Joseph’s descendants, the evil eye has no dominion over them.

The LORD will guard you from all harm; He will guard your life.

The Angel who redeemed me from all evil, should bless the lads, and let my name be called on them, together with the name of my fathers, Avraham and Yitzchok. May they be like fish [of the sea], multiplying within [amongst people upon] the land.

be pleased that the angel whom thou didst ordain for me, to redeem me from all evil, may bless the children; and let my name be called upon them, and the names of my fathers Abrabam and Izhak. And as the fishes of the sea in multiplying are multiplied in the sea, so may the children of Joseph be multiplied abundantly in the midst of the earth.

וירע בעיניו, “it displeased him (Joseph).” I heard from Rabbi Levi Yitzchok that the reason that Joseph was displeased was that he thought that he, Joseph, was a fool not to have known in which order to position his sons for the blessing, whereas he had done so correctly.

וירא, it is possible that Yaakov made this comment even before he began the formal blessing, or that after he commenced blessing them that this was the first part of the blessing.

IT DISPLEASED HIM. Perhaps Joseph loved Menasheh more on account of his being the first-born. Hence it displeased him. The correct interpretation in my opinion is that he thought that his father had made a mistake concerning them, and if his blessing will be without true knowledge it will never be fulfilled upon them as it will not have been done with the proper Ruach Hakodesh (holy spirit). But when his father told him, I know it, my son, I know it, (Verse 19 here.) he was reconciled.

כי ישית, before he had started blessing them (Verse 7) Joseph had noticed that his father had crossed his hands. ויאמר יוסף אל אביו לא כן אבי, it is not correct to translate this line as: “you are not doing the correct thing.” If that were what Joseph had had in mind he would not have spoken so dismissively, but would have asked his father why he was doing this.What Joseph said to his father must be understood as follows: “the sons have not been positioned by me in the order in which you think, by my not paying attention who should be on your right, i.e. the eldest on your right, etc., but I have made sure that my firstborn is already on your right and his brother on your left. There is therefore no need for you to bend your arms, etc.”

ויתמך יד אביו; HE HELD UP HIS FATHER’S HAND — He lifted it up from his son’s head and upheld it in his hand to remove it etc.

He lifted it from his son’s head... Rashi needed to explain this because הרמה means removing, but ויתמוך means supporting, [and they are opposites].

While Jacob was reciting the blessing, Joseph saw that his father had switched his hands, as he would lay his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, and it displeased him. Joseph expected Jacob to give preference to Manasseh, the firstborn, by placing his right hand upon him. Since his father’s vision was impaired, Joseph surmised that he had erred. Perhaps Joseph was displeased because he felt that Jacob thought that Joseph himself had mistakenly placed his sons on the wrong sides. In order to rectify what Joseph perceived as an error, he supported his father’s hand from below, to remove it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh.

וירע בעיניו, “Joseph was displeased by his father having placed his right hand on Ephrayim;” perhaps Joseph loved Menashe better seeing that he was his eldest son, and that it bothered him that his father appeared to ignore this point. Perhaps he only thought that Yaakov had done what he did mistakenly; and as soon as he heard that his father had done so intentionally he was reconciled to the holy spirit which guided his father’s hands.

“He thought it was wrong” [48:17]. Joseph saw that Jacob placed his right hand on Ephraim. He was very unhappy about this and wanted to take away Jacob’s hand and wanted to place it properly. That is to say, he wanted to place the right hand on Menashe, and said to his father: Menashe is the firstborn. Therefore, place your right hand on Menashe. His father responded to Joseph, “I know my son, I know” [48:19]. That is, I know well that he is the oldest and a great nation will come from him, but the younger is better. That is to say, Gideon will be descended from him, and the Holy One will do a miracle for Israel, through his hands. However, from Ephraim the younger one, Joshua will be descended and he will make the land an inheritance for Israel and will teach Torah to Israel. He will wage war with the nations. He will make the sun stand still in the city of Gibeon. That is to say, the day will be longer for the sake of Joshua, so that he should be able to destroy the nations. Similarly, he also caused the moon to remain standing in the city of Emek Alon because of the war. (Rashi, Genesis, 48:19.) Ramban writes. Why did it hurt Joseph so much that Jacob placed the right hand on Ephraim? They were both his children. The explanation is that Joseph thought that Jacob had lost his prophetic powers and that is why he made a mistake and placed his right hand on Ephraim, the younger one. Therefore, the blessing would not be fulfilled since he made a mistake and without sense. Jacob responded: I do have sense and know well that he is the older one, so be quiet Joseph. (Ramban, Genesis, 48:19.) Toldot Yizhak asks a question. Why did Joseph allow the children to be blessed when Jacob put his right hand on Ephraim? He should have immediately taken away his hand before he had uttered the blessing. The explanation is that Joseph thought that Jacob wanted to honor each son and therefore he placed his right hand on Ephraim, the younger one. He wanted to honor him with a great blessing. That is, he would bless him better. When Joseph saw that he blessed them both with one blessing, then Joseph was upset that he had put the right hand on Ephraim. Jacob responded: “I know my son, I know” [48:19]. That is, two times, I know. Why I put my right hand on Ephraim. I also know that I did not bless Menashe more. On the contrary, I wanted to bless Ephraim more. Israel should bless their children, “God make you like Ephraim and Menashe” [48:20]. They should mention Ephraim before Menashe. So writes Toldot Yizhak. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 48:17–20.) However, Bahya writes. “He put Ephraim before Menashe” [48:20]. This means, he placed Ephraim before Menashe. That is to say, like a servant stands before the master to serve him. So said Jacob. You are younger and Menashe is older. A younger brother should honor the older brother. Therefore, be careful about the honor of Menashe who is the firstborn. (Bahya, Genesis, 48:20.) When Jacob had finished blessing the children, Jacob again began to bless Joseph separately and told him about the exile and about how the Holy One will bring the redemption for Israel. (Bahya, Genesis, 48:21.)

As in and he laid his right hand on the head of Efraim [see Gen. 48:14 ( and Gen. 48:17 }] -- The head of Efraim is the spiritual side of Mashiach ben Yosef who is aided by the abundance of Lovingkindness from the right side. This is what is meant by “his right hand on the head of Efraim.” Among the hints of the Gaon, is that in gematria equals [832]. Also, among the hints of the Gaon (according to my father, my teacher, R’ Benyamin), equals ! [1062 ] [Isa. 33:20] “visualize Zion, the city of our designated time”.

[2] "And another explanation: Ephraim is a dear son to me. As it says (Hosea 11:3), "I taught Ephraim to walk." The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "I carried him and held him by his arms. When Jacob took him between his arms, as it is said (Genesis 48:13), "And Joseph took them both." Now what is written afterwards (Genesis 48:8)? "And Israel saw Joseph's sons, and said, 'Who are these?'" What did Jacob see that he asked, "Who are these?" He already knew them, as it is said (Genesis 48:5), "And now your two sons." Rather, our father Jacob foresaw that a descendant of Ephraim, namely Jeroboam son of Nebat the Ephraimite, would make two golden calves, as it is said (1 Kings 11:26), "And Jeroboam son of Nebat, an Ephraimite, took his stand." He would then say (1 Kings 12:28), "These are your gods, O Israel." Therefore, Jacob said, "Who are these?" And Joseph replied (Genesis 48:9), "These are my sons." What did Joseph do? He removed his crown from his head and released his belt (or "girdle") before Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 48:12), "And Joseph took them both." He said to him, "Do you see what sins they will commit?" Jacob answered, "I do not." Once he heard this, Joseph said to him (Genesis 48:9), "Bring them to me and I will bless them." Immediately Joseph took them both (Genesis 48:13), and Israel stretched out his right hand. When Joseph saw this, he was displeased, as it is said (Genesis 48:17), "And Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand." He said to him, "Do you think that I have no strength left in my old age? By your life, I still have as much strength as they do." But his father refused (Genesis 48:19)." "And from Menasheh fell [to] David, etc. (I Chronicles 12:20). However, his brother etc. (Genesis 48:19), this is Yehoshua who stands from Ephraim, as it says, "from the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea, son of Nun" (Numbers 13:8), who erected the wall, and all the nations of the world look and see. Therefore, "and his seed shall become a multitude of nations" (Genesis 48:19). The Holy One Blessed be He said, "I have seen how good Ephraim is; take them on my arms" (Hosea 11:3). When The Holy One Blessed be He said said, "Bring them to me" (Genesis 48:9), I was there and revealed a mystery to Jacob about Ephraim and Jeroboam, although they did not know that I had healed them (Hosea 11:3). Ephraim, the beloved son, is dear to me.

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:55). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]…” – do not read it as kaarat, but rather as akart, corresponding to Jacob, who extracted [akar] the birthright (The birthright refers to the extra portion of the inheritance that the eldest son received.) from Reuben and gave it to Joseph: “I have given you one portion more than your brothers…” (Genesis 48:22). “Silver” – just as it says: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20), just as he (Silver alludes to the statement made by Jacob, who was righteous.) said: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be for me like Reuben and Simeon” (Genesis 48:5). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – when Jacob descended to Egypt on account of Joseph, he was one hundred and thirty years old, as it is stated: “Jacob said to Pharaoh: The days of the years of my residence are one hundred and thirty years” (Genesis 47:9). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – corresponding to Joseph, who was cast [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “Silver” – after: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20) – what he said to his father (Silver alludes to the statement made by Joseph, who was righteous.) : “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn; place your right hand upon his head” (Genesis 48:18). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel” – as it was through him that seventy people descended to Egypt. “Both of them full…” – Jacob and Joseph, both of them were full-fledged righteous men and both produced tribes. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:56). “One gold ladle of ten shekels…” – corresponding to the ten districts of Manasseh, as it is stated: “Ten districts fell to Manasseh” (Joshua 17:5). “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:57). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:58). “One young bull, one ram [one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering]; one goat…” – these (This is a reference to the three burnt offerings.) are three corresponding to the three generations that Joseph saw from Manasseh that received a portion in the land, (This is a reference to the fact that there were three major families named after the three generations following Manasseh, in addition to the family which was named after Manasseh himself. Therefore, the phrase “the sons of Makhir” refers to Makhir himself, Gilad, and Iezer.) as it is stated: “The children of Makhir son of Manasseh, too, were born at Joseph’s knees” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise, it says: “The sons of Manasseh: For Makhir, the family of the Makhirites, and Makhir begot Gilad.… These are the sons of Gilad: Of Iezer…” (Numbers 26:29–30). Makhir, Gilad, and Iezer – these are three generations that were patrilineal houses that were attributed to Joseph, as Manasseh is attributed to Jacob, just as it says: “And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before my coming to you to Egypt, they are mine” (Genesis 48:5). The fourth, this was Ya’ir son of Manasseh, who received a portion in the land, just as it says: “Ya’ir son of Manasseh went and captured their villages [ḥavot], and he called them Ḥavot Ya’ir” (Numbers 32:41). The three species of burnt offerings corresponded to the sons of Makhir son of Manasseh. (This is referring to what was mentioned above, and is mentioned again since the midrash now also explains what the sin offering signifies.) The goat sin offering corresponded to Ya’ir, who did not bequeath his portion to his sons, because he did not have sons. That is why he called them (The villages.) by his name, because he did not have any remnant, and the sons of his brother Makhir inherited his portion. “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Gamliel son of Pedatzur” (Numbers 7:59). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the tribe of Manasseh, which split into two and received two portions in the land, half of it on the east bank of the Jordan and half in the land of Canaan. “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these are three species, corresponding to three things that Joseph did on behalf of Manasseh, whom he sought to elevate over his brother Ephraim. The first: “Joseph took the two of them, Ephraim in his right hand to the left of Israel, and Manasseh in his left hand to the right of Israel” (Genesis 48:13). The second: “He supported his father’s hand, to remove it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh” (Genesis 48:17). The third: “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn…” (Genesis 48:18). Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five women from the tribe of Manasseh who took a portion in the land. These were Tzelofḥad’s five daughters, just as it says: “Tzelofḥad’s daughters speak justly; give them a holding for inheritance…” (Numbers 27:7). They were five, as it is stated: “These are the names of his daughters: Maḥla, Noa, Ḥogla, Milka, and Tirtza” (Numbers 27:1). Likewise, Jacob mentioned them in the blessing of Joseph, as it is stated: “Branches [banot] ran atop the wall [alei shur]” (Genesis 49:22); these are Tzelofḥad’s daughters [banot], who received a portion in the land. Alternatively, why were they five each? It corresponds to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “May they proliferate like fish in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16), and fish were created on the fifth day. “This was the offering of Gamliel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Gamliel…”

“Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, and it displeased him; he supported his father’s hand, to remove it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh” (Genesis 48:17). “Joseph saw that his father was placing…” – Rabbi Berekhya said: The hand that overcame one-third of the world, (See Bereshit Rabba 68:12.) you are seeking to move it? “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn; place your right hand upon his head. His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know; he too will become a people, and he too will be great; however, his younger brother will be greater than he, and his descendants will be the plenitude of nations” (Genesis 48:18–19). “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father.… His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know” – I know the incident of Reuben and Bilha and the incident of Judah and Tamar; (I know that they all acted with pure intentions (Yefe To’ar).) if matters that were not revealed to you were revealed to me, matters that were revealed to you, all the more so. “He too will become a people, and he too will be great” – is it possible that it will be so? (The continuation of the verse states that Ephraim would be “the plenitude of nations.” The midrash asks: Is it possible that one tribe would be so numerous?) Rather, this is Joshua, who stopped the orb of the sun and the moon, which have dominion from one end of the world to the other end. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Bad slave, are you not the purchase of my father… (Joshua said to the sun: ‘You prostrated yourself to my father Joseph in his dream; therefore you must obey me’ (see Bereshit Rabba 84:11). )

R. Yonathan says (Devarim 6:8-9) "and you shall tie them … and you shall write them": Just as the writing (of the mezuzah) is with the right hand, so, the tying of the tefillin (on the left hand). Abba Yossi says: We find the right to be called "hand," and even though there is no proof (for its application here), it is intimated in (Genesis 48:17) "that his father placed his right hand." And what is the intent of "upon your hand"? To include an amputee (of the left hand), that his tefillin are placed on his right arm.

R. Samuel the son of Nahman stated: The Holy Spirit forsook Jacob twice. Once when he wished to bless Manasseh and Ephraim, and again when he was about to reveal the time of redemption. And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it upon Ephraim’s head (Gen. 48:14). He began to bless him with the words: And let them increase like fish (ibid., v. 16). He thus indicated that Ephraim’s descendants would be caught like fishes, as it is said: Say now “Shibboleth”; and he said “Sibboleth” (Judg. 12:6). (Just as fishes are caught by their mouths, so too forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed because they could not pronounce the word Shibboleth correctly.) When Joseph saw that his father was laying his right hand on the head of Ephraim, it displeased him and He held up his father’s hand, to remove it (Gen. 48:17). Jacob rebuked him, saying: “Do you seek to turn away the hand that vanquished the foremost among the angels?” R. Yohanan said: Jacob’s arms were like two columns in the public baths in Tiberias. And Joseph said unto his father: “Not so, my father, only this one is the firstborn” (ibid. , v. 18). And his father refused and said: “I know it, my son; I know it” (ibid., v. 19). He foresaw that Gideon would descend from Manasseh, but that his younger brother was the more important one, since Joshua would descend from him. And he blessed them that day, saying: “By thee shall Israel bless, saying: God make thee as Ephraim and Manasseh” (ibid., v. 20). He mentioned Ephraim before he mentioned Manasseh. When was his blessing finally fulfilled? At the time of the consecration of the chiefs. Then Ephraim brought his offering on the seventh day, and Manasseh on the eighth, in fulfillment of the scriptural verse: That confirmeth the word of his servant and performeth the counsel of his messengers (Isa. 44:26).

R. Yossi says: We find that the right hand, too, is called "hand," as it is written (Bereshith 48:17) "And Joseph saw that his father had placed his right hand on the head of Ephraim and it was wrong in his eyes, and he took hold of his father's hand to remove it, etc." (If so, how is "upon your hand" to be understood, if it can signify either right or left)? To include an amputee (of the left hand), that he places it on the right.

החרישו ושמעו אלי ═ החרישו אלי Be silent and listen unto me. (To join a preposition to a verb, which does not govern it, while the verb which governs it is omitted, is a construction known as constructio pregnans; as e.g. here, החרישו ושמעו אלי ═ החרישו אלי and להסיר אותה מעל ראש אפרים ולשום אותה על ר״ מנ״═ אפרים על ראש מנשה להסיר אותה מעל ראש to remove it from Ephraim’s head unto Manasseh’s head. (Gen. 48:17). —A. V., Keep silence before me.)

guide Heb. תומיך. You lowered my hand onto the portion, an expression of (Ecc. 10: 18): “the rafter sinks (ימך),” is lowered. In this manner it is expounded upon in Sifrei (Deut. 11:26, 27). It can also be interpreted as an expression of support, according to the Midrash Aggadah, as (in Gen. 48:17) “he supported (ויתמך) his father’s hand.”

Rebbi Ḥanania in the name of Rebbi Phineas: Corresponding to the eighteen times the Patriarchs are mentioned together in the Torah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob. If somebody will tell you that there are nineteen, tell him that Behold, the Eternal was standing on it (Gen. 23:13. In this verse Jacob is not mentioned by name.) is not counted. If somebody will tell you that there are seventeen, tell him that My name should be called over them, as well the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac (Gen. 48:16. Jacob’s name is mentioned implicitly.) is counted.

Rabbi Yosei HaḤorem says: This is no proof, as we have found that the right hand is also called yad, as it is stated: “And when Joseph saw that his father was laying his right hand [yad yemino]” (Genesis 48:17). The Gemara asks: And the other tanna, who maintains that the right hand is not called yad, how does he respond to this proof? He maintains that the right hand is called “his right hand [yad yemino],” but it is not called a yad without further specification.

Yoseif saw that his father placed his right hand on Ephraim’s head, and it was bad in his eyes. He held up his fathers hand, to remove it from Ephraim’s head [and to place it] on Menasheh’s head.

And Joseph saw that his father placed his right hand upon Ephraim's head; and it was evil before him, and he uplifted his father's hand to remove it from off the head of Ephraim, that it might rest on the head of Menasheh.

לא כן אבי, “not so my father!” He meant: “they are not lined up in the order that you thought they were lined up.”

ויאמר יוסף..לא כן אבי, Joseph said to his father: "not so my father, etc." We need to understand why Joseph did not simply say: "this one is the firstborn," instead of the preamble "not so my father."

Joseph entertained two possible doubts. 1) Inasmuch as Joseph and his sons were facing Jacob, and it was customary for Joseph to have his firstborn on his right and the younger one on his left, they would appear in the reverse position when viewed from Jacob's vantage point. Jacob may therefore have reasoned that in order to place his right hand on the older one of the two he had to cross his hands. 2) On the other hand, Joseph reasoned that it was possible that his father crossed his hands in order to place his right hand on the head of Ephrayim, deliberately, thus giving him preference over Menashe. In view of this Joseph first told his father that if he had assumed that Joseph had placed the boys as he usually did, i.e. Menashe on his right, לא כן אבי, i.e. he did not do so this time. If, on the other hand, Jacob had deliberately placed his right hand on the head of Ephrayim, Joseph registered his protest by saying: "place your right hand on him for he is the firstborn." He wanted to know why his father denied his firstborn what he thought he was entitled to.

לא כן אבי, I did not do as you thought but placed my firstborn on your right and the younger one on your left. Yaakov replied that he was aware of this (verse 19) because “I know that you are a wise man and would see to it that your sons had been placed in the manner in which you intended them to receive their blessings. However, I plan to bless the younger one who is on your right with my right hand and I withdrew my left hand from his head in order to be able to do this.” להסיר אותה מעל ראש אפרים, and to transfer it (my left hand) to על ראש מנשה, to the head of Menashe. Whenever the verb הסר appears it is written in a sort of abbreviated syntax, the predicate which is supposed to follow it or precede it being omitted. Some examples are: Judges 4,18 סורה אלי אל תירא, the meaning being סורה משם לפנות אלי, “turn away from there in order to turn towards me.” A similar example of this is found in Genesis 19,3 ויסורו אליו, where the precedingמשם לבא, “from there in order to come” is omitted and the reader has to fill it in by understanding the context .

כי זה הבכור. שים נא ידך על ראשו. Once he would place his hand on the head of Menashe, Joseph felt sure that his father’s mind would follow the direction of his hand. This has been illustrated in Numbers 27,23 when Moses placed his hands on Joshua when appointing him as his successor. [if the physical contact would not be of significance, why would Moses have bothered? Ed.] The right hand is presumed to be stronger than the left, hence a blessing conveyed by means of the right hand would be a stronger, more comprehensive blessing.

Joseph also said explicitly to his father: Not so, my father, as this one, Manasseh, is the firstborn; place your right hand upon his head.

לא כן, “not so,” some people claim that Joseph certainly did not say to his father outright that he had not acted correctly, but that the words meant that he, Joseph, had been mistaken when he had thought that his father had erred. Nonetheless, Joseph told his father that he preferred for him to place his right hand on the firstborn Menashe.

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:55). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]…” – do not read it as kaarat, but rather as akart, corresponding to Jacob, who extracted [akar] the birthright (The birthright refers to the extra portion of the inheritance that the eldest son received.) from Reuben and gave it to Joseph: “I have given you one portion more than your brothers…” (Genesis 48:22). “Silver” – just as it says: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20), just as he (Silver alludes to the statement made by Jacob, who was righteous.) said: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be for me like Reuben and Simeon” (Genesis 48:5). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – when Jacob descended to Egypt on account of Joseph, he was one hundred and thirty years old, as it is stated: “Jacob said to Pharaoh: The days of the years of my residence are one hundred and thirty years” (Genesis 47:9). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – corresponding to Joseph, who was cast [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “Silver” – after: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20) – what he said to his father (Silver alludes to the statement made by Joseph, who was righteous.) : “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn; place your right hand upon his head” (Genesis 48:18). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel” – as it was through him that seventy people descended to Egypt. “Both of them full…” – Jacob and Joseph, both of them were full-fledged righteous men and both produced tribes. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:56). “One gold ladle of ten shekels…” – corresponding to the ten districts of Manasseh, as it is stated: “Ten districts fell to Manasseh” (Joshua 17:5). “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:57). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:58). “One young bull, one ram [one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering]; one goat…” – these (This is a reference to the three burnt offerings.) are three corresponding to the three generations that Joseph saw from Manasseh that received a portion in the land, (This is a reference to the fact that there were three major families named after the three generations following Manasseh, in addition to the family which was named after Manasseh himself. Therefore, the phrase “the sons of Makhir” refers to Makhir himself, Gilad, and Iezer.) as it is stated: “The children of Makhir son of Manasseh, too, were born at Joseph’s knees” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise, it says: “The sons of Manasseh: For Makhir, the family of the Makhirites, and Makhir begot Gilad.… These are the sons of Gilad: Of Iezer…” (Numbers 26:29–30). Makhir, Gilad, and Iezer – these are three generations that were patrilineal houses that were attributed to Joseph, as Manasseh is attributed to Jacob, just as it says: “And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before my coming to you to Egypt, they are mine” (Genesis 48:5). The fourth, this was Ya’ir son of Manasseh, who received a portion in the land, just as it says: “Ya’ir son of Manasseh went and captured their villages [ḥavot], and he called them Ḥavot Ya’ir” (Numbers 32:41). The three species of burnt offerings corresponded to the sons of Makhir son of Manasseh. (This is referring to what was mentioned above, and is mentioned again since the midrash now also explains what the sin offering signifies.) The goat sin offering corresponded to Ya’ir, who did not bequeath his portion to his sons, because he did not have sons. That is why he called them (The villages.) by his name, because he did not have any remnant, and the sons of his brother Makhir inherited his portion. “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Gamliel son of Pedatzur” (Numbers 7:59). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the tribe of Manasseh, which split into two and received two portions in the land, half of it on the east bank of the Jordan and half in the land of Canaan. “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these are three species, corresponding to three things that Joseph did on behalf of Manasseh, whom he sought to elevate over his brother Ephraim. The first: “Joseph took the two of them, Ephraim in his right hand to the left of Israel, and Manasseh in his left hand to the right of Israel” (Genesis 48:13). The second: “He supported his father’s hand, to remove it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh” (Genesis 48:17). The third: “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn…” (Genesis 48:18). Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five women from the tribe of Manasseh who took a portion in the land. These were Tzelofḥad’s five daughters, just as it says: “Tzelofḥad’s daughters speak justly; give them a holding for inheritance…” (Numbers 27:7). They were five, as it is stated: “These are the names of his daughters: Maḥla, Noa, Ḥogla, Milka, and Tirtza” (Numbers 27:1). Likewise, Jacob mentioned them in the blessing of Joseph, as it is stated: “Branches [banot] ran atop the wall [alei shur]” (Genesis 49:22); these are Tzelofḥad’s daughters [banot], who received a portion in the land. Alternatively, why were they five each? It corresponds to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “May they proliferate like fish in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16), and fish were created on the fifth day. “This was the offering of Gamliel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Gamliel…”

“Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, and it displeased him; he supported his father’s hand, to remove it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh” (Genesis 48:17). “Joseph saw that his father was placing…” – Rabbi Berekhya said: The hand that overcame one-third of the world, (See Bereshit Rabba 68:12.) you are seeking to move it? “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn; place your right hand upon his head. His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know; he too will become a people, and he too will be great; however, his younger brother will be greater than he, and his descendants will be the plenitude of nations” (Genesis 48:18–19). “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father.… His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know” – I know the incident of Reuben and Bilha and the incident of Judah and Tamar; (I know that they all acted with pure intentions (Yefe To’ar).) if matters that were not revealed to you were revealed to me, matters that were revealed to you, all the more so. “He too will become a people, and he too will be great” – is it possible that it will be so? (The continuation of the verse states that Ephraim would be “the plenitude of nations.” The midrash asks: Is it possible that one tribe would be so numerous?) Rather, this is Joshua, who stopped the orb of the sun and the moon, which have dominion from one end of the world to the other end. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Bad slave, are you not the purchase of my father… (Joshua said to the sun: ‘You prostrated yourself to my father Joseph in his dream; therefore you must obey me’ (see Bereshit Rabba 84:11). )

SO ESAU DESPISED HIS BIRTHRIGHT. Who so despiseth the word shall suffer thereby. (Proverbs 13:13. Ramban’s intent in quoting this verse is to explain why it was necessary for the verse before us to say, So Esau ‘despised,’ since, as is clearly indicated in Scripture later on, Esau regretted his action and complained that he [Jacob] took my birthright. (Further, 28:36.) Scripture therefore justifies what befell Esau later on by saying here, So Esau ‘despised’ the birthright, and he who despises the word shall suffer thereby.) But, indeed, Scripture has already explained the reason that Esau consented to the sale. This was because he was in mortal danger from his hunting animals, and it was likely that he would die while his father was alive, and the birthright carried with it no distinction except after the passing of the father. So of what benefit was the birthright to him? This then is what Scripture says: And he did eat and drink, and he rose and went, and he despised, for, after having eaten and drunk, he returned to his hunt in the field which was the cause of the despising of the birthright. For there is no desire in fools (Ecclesiastes 5:3.) except to eat and drink and to fulfill their momentary desire, not giving a care for tomorrow. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra has erred here exceedingly by saying that Esau despised the birthright because he saw his father destitute of wealth. Now, [continues Ibn Ezra,] many wonder about Isaac’s poverty since Abraham left him with great wealth. But have they never seen a person who was wealthy in his younger years and became poor in his old age? An indication that Isaac was indeed poor is the fact that Isaac loved Esau because of his venison. Furthermore, had there been abundant food in his father’s house and he [Esau] “the honorable one in his sight,” (See Isaiah 43:4.) he would not have sold his birthright for pottage. Also, if his father ate savory meat every day, what reason was there for him to say to Esau, “Bring me some venison?” (See further, 27:3-4.) Why did Jacob not have costly garments as Esau had? (See ibid., Verse 15.) Why did his mother not give Jacob some silver and gold for his journey when he fled to Haran so that he had to say, And He will give me bread to eat, and a garment to put on? (Ibid., 28:20.) Why did she not send him some money — since she loved him — so that he was required to tend Laban’s flock? (All these questions indicate that Isaac was indeed poor.) The verse which states, Thus the man grew (Further, 26:13.) [in wealth], must refer to the period before he became old. Now ignorant people think that wealth is a great distinction for the righteous. Let Elijah prove the contrary. (See I Kings 17:6, where Elijah’s poverty is depicted.) These ignorant people further ask, “Why did G-d cause Isaac to lack wealth?” Perhaps they could also inform us why He caused Isaac’s vision to be diminished? And let them not dismiss me with a reply based upon a d’rash (The D’rash (Aggadic) answer is that Isaac’s eyes became dim as a result of Esau’s wives offering incense to the idols. See Rashi further, 27:1, where this is one of several reasons mentioned.) for there is indeed a secret (Interpreters of Ibn Ezra suggest that “the secret” referred to here is the fact that Isaac was a son of Abraham’s old age, and it was for this reason that his eyesight was weak.) in the matter, and we must not probe since the thoughts of G-d are deep and no man has the power to understand them. All these are Abraham ibn Ezra’s words. Now I wonder who has blinded Abraham ibn Ezra’s reasoning in this matter, causing him to say that Abraham left Isaac great wealth, and he lost it just prior to this event, [that is, the sale of the birthright], and for this reason, Esau despised the birthright, for this matter of the sale of the birthright took place when Jacob and Esau were still young, before Esau married, as Scripture tells, (And Esau was forty years old when he took to wife. (26:34).) and after the sale of the birthright, Isaac again became wealthy in the land of the Philistines until he became very great… and the Philistines were jealous of him. (Further, 26:13-14.) Following that, [according to Ibn Ezra, we must say that Isaac] again became poor, and he desired the venison of his son Esau and the savory meats. All this is laughable. Furthermore, the verse says, And it came to pass after the death of Abraham, that G-d blessed his son Isaac. (Above, 25:11.) Now the blessing refers to increase of wealth, possessions and honor, but where was His blessing if he lost the wealth of his father and became impoverished? Afterwards it says, And I will be with Thee, and I will bless thee, (Further, 26:3.) [but according to Ibn Ezra you will have to say that Isaac] became rich and then poor! And if it be true that in matters of wealth, There are righteous men unto whom it happeneth according to the work of the wicked, (Ecclesiastes 8:14.) this does not apply to those righteous men who have been expressly blessed by the Holy One, blessed be He, since the blessing of the Eternal maketh rich, and no sorrow is added thereto. (Proverbs 10:22.) Rather, the patriarchs all were as kings before whom kings of the nations came and with whom they made covenants. Now it is written concerning Isaac and Abimelech, And they swore one to another. (Further, 26:31.) But if Isaac had suffered bad fortune and lost his father’s wealth, how did [Abimelech, King of the Philistines, and Phichol, the head of his army], say, we saw plainly that the Eternal was with thee, (Ibid., Verse 28.) when he was already in financial difficulty? Rather, Esau’s disdain of the birthright was due to his brutal nature. It is possible that the law of double portion to which the firstborn is entitled according to the statutes of the Torah (Deuteronomy 21:17.) was not in effect in ancient times. (That is, in the time of the patriarchs.) [At that time the birthright] was only a matter of inheriting the pre-eminence of the father and his authority so that he [the firstborn] would receive honor and distinction in relation to his younger brother. It is for this reason that Esau said to Isaac, I am thy son, thy firstborn, (Further, 27:32.) meaning to say that he is the firstborn who deserves to be blessed. Similarly, [Joseph said to his father, Jacob], For this is the firstborn; put thy hand upon his head, (Ibid., 48:18.) thereby meaning that Jacob should give him precedence in the blessing. Perhaps the firstborn also took slightly more of the inheritance since the law of double portion is an innovation of the statutes of the Torah. (Thus even in ancient times it was customary that the firstborn inherit more than one share. However, the Torah established his portion to be two shares. This interpretation differs from Ramban’s original thesis that the firstborn originally had no preference whatever in inheritance, and that the Torah instituted this law.) And as for the venison in his mouth which Isaac desired so strongly, this is in keeping with the custom of princes and kings. They prefer venison above all food, and out of fear, all nations bring them gifts of venison. Esau flattered his father by bringing him all the venison so that he may always eat of it to his heart’s content, (Ramban thus explains Isaac’s desire for venison without postulating Isaac’s poverty as Ibn Ezra did.) and the love of a father for his firstborn is easily understood. As for Isaac’s saying that he would bless Esau after he had prepared the savory meats for him, that was not a reward or a recompense for the food. Instead, he wanted to derive some benefit from him so that his very soul would be bound up in his at the time that he brought him the food so that he would then bless him with a complete desire and a perfect will. Perhaps Isaac discerned in himself that following the meal his soul would be delighted and joyous, and then the Ruach Hakodesh (“The holy spirit.” The expression refers to a degree of prophecy. See Moreh Nebuchim, II, 45 (2).) would come upon him, [as was the case with Elisha the prophet, who said], ‘But now bring me a minstrel. And it came to pass, when the minstrel played, that the hand of the Eternal came upon him. (II Kings 3:15.) And as for not giving wealth to Jacob, that was [not due to Isaac’s poverty but rather] because Jacob was fleeing for his life. He left the country alone without his brother’s knowledge, and had he been given along wealth, servants and camels, they would have increased his enemies’ jealousy and resulted in their ambushing him and killing him. Our Rabbis do indeed say that Jacob was robbed [at the outset of his journey (Bereshith Rabbah 68:2. Thus another difficulty tending to favor Ibn Ezra’s thesis that Isaac was poverty stricken is resolved.) of whatever possessions he had]. And who has told Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra that Jacob had no costly garments, fine linen and silk and embroidered robes? (Ezekiel 16:13.) Rather, Scripture states that when going to the field to hunt, Esau would change his garments for his hunting clothes, and due to the fact that [because of his dim eyesight], Isaac always touched his son and his clothes with his hands, Rebekah clothed Jacob with them lest he recognize him by his clothes. You see that this is precisely what Isaac did: And he smelled the odor of his garments (Further, 27:27.) because he had put them among calamus and cinnamon, even as it is written, Myrrh and aloes, and cassia are all thy garments. (Psalms 45:9.) The spices grew in the Land of Israel, and it is for this reason that Isaac said, The odor of my son is as the odor of a field. (Further, 27:27.) Because he was a man of the field (See above, Verse 27.) his garments had the odor of the field or that of the blossoms of the trees, just as our Rabbis explained it: As the odor of a field (Further, 27:27.) of apples. (Taanith 29b.) And as for the question raised above concerning the quality of Isaac’s lack of vision, it is a question raised by the ignorant, for if (Further in the text Ramban suggests that Isaac’s dim vision was a natural result of his old age. Hence he writes here: “If it was brought about.”) it was brought about especially by G-d, it was in order that Isaac bless Jacob, this being the purport of the verse, And it came to pass, that when Isaac was old, and his eyes were dim, he called Esau. (Further, 27:1.) And in line with the natural meaning of Scripture, this was but a manifestation of old age, the explanation of the verse being as follows: And it came to pass, that when Isaac was old, and his eyes were dim in his old age, he called Esau. Now of Jacob himself it is said later on, Now the eyes of Israel were dim for age, so that he could not see. (Ibid., 48:10.) Of Achiyah the Shilonite it is also written, Now Achiyah could not see; for his eyes were set by reason of his age, (I Kings 14:4.) and concerning Moses our teacher it is related with wonder that his eye was not dim. (Deuteronomy 34:7.)

Yoseif said to his father, Not so, my father, for this one is the firstborn, place your right hand on his head.

And Joseph said to his father, Not so, my father, for this is the firstborn; lay thy right hand on his head.

A MULTITUDE OF NATIONS. Many nations shall descend from him (The verse reads, melo ha-goyim. Its literal translation is, a fullness of the nations. I.E. points out that melo (fullness) is to be rendered as many, a multitude. Filwarg asks, “Who were the many nations descended from Ephraim?”)

וימאן אביו ויאמר, His father refused, saying, etc. The reason the Torah uses the word "he refused," is to indicate that Joseph had taken hold of his father's hand to try and place it on Menashe's head.

The reason Jacob repeated: "I know my son, I know, etc." is that Jacob wanted to answer both of Joseph's doubts as we have already explained. To Joseph's remark "not so my father," Jacob replied that he was well aware that Joseph had already placed the children in such a position that he, Jacob, did not have to cross his hands in order to put his right hand on the head of Menashe. By adding the word בני, my son, Jacob hinted that he had given Joseph credit for placing the boys in the position which he considered as appropriate. Concerning Joseph's specific concern that the firstborn be accorded the privileges due him, Jacob also said: "I know;" he assured Joseph that Menashe too would attain greatness. Joseph should not think that Jacob considered his firstborn as unworthy or inferior. If he had nonetheless decided to place his right hand on the head of Ephrayim this was in view of Ephrayim's descendants outranking Menashe's descendants at some time in the future. Ephrayim was destined to become מלא הגוים, meaning that at that time he would occupy a higher position though at the moment Menashe fulfilled his role of the firstborn perfectly. Tanchuma elaborates that Joshua would be descended from Ephrayim whereas Gideon would be descended from Menashe, both leaders of the Jewish people during their respective lifetimes. Both had already been destined for their respective roles in life; Jacob only gave recognition to this by the manner in which he placed his hands when blessing both these children.

Alternatively, Jacob meant that he was thoroughly familiar with Joseph's arguments; when Joseph had hinted that the birthright should determine on whose hand Jacob was to place his right hand, Joseph was wrong, it was not the order of birth which determined matters like this. By adding the word בני, Jacob hinted that Joseph himself had foreseen future developments in his dreams. Similarly, Jacob could not now act in defiance of G'd who had shown him in a vision that the younger son would outshine his older brother.

וגם הוא יגדל ואולם אחיו הקטן יגדל ממנו, “he too will become great; however, his younger brother will become even greater than he.” Yaakov used both the adjectives “great” and “small” in connection with Joseph’s sons. We have encountered this description of relative “smallness” already in connection with the sun and the moon on the fourth day of creation (Genesis 1,16) where both luminaries have first been described as “great;” subsequently the Torah distinguishes the relative greatness of one of he luminaries, the sun, by describing it as “great” when compared to the lesser luminary the moon. The “greatness” of Ephrayim which Yaakov referred to was that Joshua would be descended from that tribe. Joshua was so great that he could arrest the orbit of both sun and moon as we know from Joshua 10,12. In response to Joshua’s instruction for the sun and the moon to “stand still,” the Book of Joshua informs us in Joshua 10,13 that they did indeed interrupted their respective orbits until Joshua had taken his revenge of the Canaanites. In that verse the prophet reports that this miracle was recorded in a book called ספר הישר, and our sages in Avodah Zarah 25 have revealed to us that the ספר הישר is none other than the Book of Genesis, a Book describing the outstanding feats of the patriarchs Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov. They are the ones who are called ישרים, “the upright ones.” Joshua was a product of these people and the prophet testifies that G’d was with Joshua and that his fame spread throughout the globe (Joshua 6,27).

יהיה לעם, will become so numerous until people will refer to his descendants as “a nation.”

וגם הוא יגדל, he will also develop into becoming very numerous. However his younger brother will become even more numerous. At the Exodus from Egyptian the arms-bearing males of the tribe of Ephrayim were 45.500 (Numbers 1,33-35 as opposed to only 32.200 members of the tribe of Menashe. Interestingly, when numbering the males over 20 who entered the Holy Land, the members of the tribe of Menashe outnumbered those of Ephrayim by 52.700 to 32.500. (Numbers 26,34-36.) If we keep this in mind we may have to redefine the meaning of the word יגדל when used by Yaakov not as referring to numerical strength, but as referring to the great men produced by each of these tribes and the relative importance of these men. We know that Moses’ successor, Joshua, was from the tribe of Ephrayim. He was a great saviour, and conquered the land of Canaan enabling the promise of G’d to the patriarchs to finally become realised. The tribe of Ephrayim also provided the first king of the 10 tribes who had split away from Solomon’s son Rechavam after the death of Solomon. Furthermore, throughout the history of the Jewish people until the destruction of the first Temple the political rivalry between Ephrayim and Yehudah is well documented, whereas hardly ever is Menashe mentioned as playing a major part in this. When the prophet Isaiah prophesied an idyllic future, he described this as being characterised by the end of the rivalry between Ephrayim and Yehudah. (Isaiah 11,13). Still, it is possible to also understand the word יגדל ממנו as referring to numerical strength, as except in the single instance we mentioned before Ephrayim always outnumbered Menashe. We must also take into consideration the words וזרעו יהיה מלא הגויים, “and his seed will become plentiful enough to form nations.” The unique phenomenon of the members of Ephrayim being inferior in numbers at the time the Israelites entered the Holy Land may possibly be accounted for by the tradition that 30 years prior to the Exodus the tribe of Ephrayim rebelled, left Egypt and marched to the land of the Philistines on the way to the land of Canaan. According to that report they lost 200.000 of their number in a battle at Gat. [the reason why I do not think this relevant is that if so, there should have been fewer member of the tribe of Ephrayim at the time of the Exodus, instead of 40 years later when near entering the Holy Land. Ed.]

יהיה מלא הגויים, until his descendants are numerous enough when they go into exile to fill countries belonging to, or having belonged to other nations with their numbers alone. [possibly a reference to the population transfer mentioned in Kings II after the Assyrians conquered the Northern Kingdom. and replaced the exiled Jews there with other nationals. (Kings II chapter 17) Ed.]

ואולם, “but, however.”

ידעתי בני ידעתי I KNOW IT, MY SON, I KNOW that he is the first-born.

גם הוא יהיה לעם וגם הוא יגדל HE ALSO SHALL BECOME A PEOPLE, AND HE ALSO SHALL BE GREAT, for of him will be born Gideon through whom the Holy One, blessed be He, will perform a miracle (See Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 6).

ואולם אחיו הקטן יגדל ממנו BUT TRULY HIS YOUNGER BROTHER SHALL BE GREATER THAN HE — for of him will be born Joshua who will make Israel inherit the land of Canaan and will instruct them in the Torah (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 6).

וזרעו יהיה מלא הגוים AND HIS SEED SHALL BECOME A MULTITUDE OF NATIONS (more lit, shall fill the nations) — the fame and renown of his seed, Joshua, will spread abroad and fill the whole world when he will make the sun stand still upon Gibeon and the moon in the valley of Aijalon (Avodah Zarah 25a).

גוים לעם, vergl. oben גוי וקהל גוים und . — וזרעו יהי׳ מלא הגוים buchstäblich hieße es: sein Same soll die Fülle der Völker werden, die Völker sollen von seinen Nachkommen voll werden, wie מלא כל הארץ כבודו. Das hieße denn: Efrajims Nachkommen sollen unter alle Völker zerstreut werden; es wäre dies aber dann eine קללה und kein Segen. Deshalb Raschi: von dem Ruhme seiner Kinder werden die Völker voll werden. Das steht aber nicht im Text. Wir finden מלא in der Bedeutung von Rüsten, z. B.: ויהוא מלא ידו בקשת (Kön. II. 9, 24) ואיש יגע בו ימלא ברזל וחנית (Sam. II. 23, 7). Rüsten ist ja: den Mangel an Kraft und Geschicklichkeit künstlich "ersetzen", "ergänzen", מַלֵא. Damit wäre denn Efrajim charakteristisch gezeichnet. Efrajims Nachkommen werden die Rüstung der Stämme Israels nach außen werden. Darum auch גוים, nicht עמים. Wie Josef selbst zuerst von der Jakobsfamilie getrennt, und so bedeutsam in den Kreis eines nichtjüdischen Staates eintrat, freilich aber auch als solcher den jüdischen Gotteshauch — ,ה" — treu bewahrte — עדות ביהוסף שמו בצאתו על ארץ מצרים — so hatte ja auch Efrajim später zuerst den Charakter eines nichtjüdischen Staates, freilich dann in trauriger Entfremdung, angenommen. Eine Entfremdung, die aber, so wenig wie bei seinem Ahn, mit dieser Trennung notwendig gegeben war. Es ist daher wohl möglich, daß es also heiße: "Seine Nachkommen sollen als eine von außen respektierte Macht eine Lücke in der äußeren Erscheinung der übrigen Stämme ausfüllen, sollen eine kräftigende Rüstung der übrigen Stämme nach außen werden; nächst Juda war Efrajim jedenfalls der tapferste Stamm. Vielleicht auch blickt זרעו zunächst auf Josua hin, der ja ganz eigentlich das Rüstzeug der Stämme genannt werden kann. —

Charakteristisch sehen wir hier wiederum den Erstgeborenen gegen den Jüngeren zurückgesetzt. Von Kain und Hebel an bis weit hinab erscheint diese Zurücksetzung der בכורים. Hebel war der Gottgefälligere, Kain verworfen. So war auch unter Noas Söhnen Schem vielleicht nicht der älteste. Unter Abrahams Söhnen weicht Ismael dem Jizchak, unter Jizchaks Esaw dem Jakob, unter Jakobs Söhnen Reuben dem Josef, unter Josefs Menasche dem Efrajim, und die eigentlich leitende Herrschaft kommt an Juda. Auch Mosche war der Jüngere, David der jüngste der Geschwister. Ja, die בכורות im ganzen Volke verloren ihre Würde. In diesem ganzen erkennt man eines: während einerseits der Erstgeborene der Bevorzugte, der anerkannte Vertreter der Familie bleibt und als solcher פי שנים erhält und damit angedeutet ist, daß eigentlich Geist und Macht Hand in Hand gehen sollten, so ist doch die Weltgeschichte nichts als Kampf der materiellen Macht gegen den göttlichen Geist. Das Ziel ist, wie es Ribka verkündet worden: רב יעכר צעיר, der Starke wird des Schwachen Diener. Vor diesem Ziele aber steht die geistige Potenz der nationalen Macht geschieden gegenüber: הקול כאשר תריך .קול יעקב והידים ידי עשו, ward dem Esau gesagt, erst dann wirst du ihm ebenbürtig zur Seite stehen, wenn du dich freiwillig selbst unterordnest. Bis dahin meint das materiell Gewaltige zu herrschen, wird aber stets beherrscht. Es sind dies die zwei Kronen, die, nach Secharja 6, 13-14 einst im משיה vereinigt sein werden, der כהן על כסאו, , "Priester auf seinem Throne" sein und die friedliche Vereinigung beider verwirklchen wird: ועצת שלום תהיה בין שניהם; bis dahin bleiben die Kronen nur לזכרון בהיכל ד׳, ist ihre Vereinigung nur ein im Heiligtum bewahrtes Ideal, wird fort und fort in der jüdischen Geschichte gelehrt, daß eigentlich die materielle Macht Hand in Hand mit dem Geiste gehen solle, die Wirklichkeit aber dem noch nicht entspricht. Die einerseits materiell bevorzugte Erstgeburt tritt anderseits zurück, und dieser zeitliche Widerspruch zwischen ihrer Bestimmung und der Wirklichkeit scheint selbst im Gesetze durch פדיון בכור vergegenwärtigt.

That he is the firstborn. Rashi needed to explain this so we will not think it means, “I know that he too will become a people.” I.e., that Yoseif knew Menasheh will become a people but he thought Yaakov did not know — and Yaakov said he also knows Menasheh will be great and will become a people. And [Rashi knows it does not mean this because] the verse does not say so. Yoseif said only, “For this one is the firstborn.” Thus Rashi explains: “I know,” as you do, “that he is the firstborn.” And I also know something you do not: “He too will become a people; he too will become great.”

The whole world will be filled when his reputation and name will spread... Rashi is answering the question: “His descendants will fill the nations” — does this not imply his descendants will be scattered throughout the world? And this is not [greatness] but a curse! Thus Rashi explains, “His reputation.” The verse is as if saying, “The name of his descendants will be throughout the world,” by means of [making] the moon and sun [stand still] which is seen throughout the world.

His father refused and said: I know, my son, I know which is the firstborn, despite my impaired vision. I am not withholding my blessing from the firstborn, Manasseh, as he too shall become a people, and he too shall be great. However, his younger brother Ephraim shall be greater than he with regard to the number of his descendants and their power, and his descendants shall be the plenitude of nations, as they will fill the world.

“Gad shall be raided by raiders” [48:19]. Jacob said that Gad would go with his brothers across the Jordan to wage war with the nations. They will kill many nations and the children of Gad will return from the land of Israel and will take their share in land outside the land [of Israel]. They will all come home in peace and not one of them from Gad will be killed. (Rashi, Genesis, 49:19.)

I can find support from Scripture also for this concept, that the moon remained silent so as not to make light of the honor of the righteous. This concept is reflected in the verse describing Menashe and Efraim, (Bereishis 48:19.) “Nevertheless, his younger brother will be greater than him and the renown of his seed will fill…” On the surface, it was not necessary to refer to Efraim as קטן, “younger.” It would have been sufficient to say, “his brother,” since the beginning of Yaakov’s words, “I know… also he will be…” are obviously referring to Menashe. Thus, by saying “his brother,” it would have been clear that Yaakov’s intent is to refer to Efraim. Why then should Efraim have to be described superfluously as קטן, younger?

[2] "And another explanation: Ephraim is a dear son to me. As it says (Hosea 11:3), "I taught Ephraim to walk." The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "I carried him and held him by his arms. When Jacob took him between his arms, as it is said (Genesis 48:13), "And Joseph took them both." Now what is written afterwards (Genesis 48:8)? "And Israel saw Joseph's sons, and said, 'Who are these?'" What did Jacob see that he asked, "Who are these?" He already knew them, as it is said (Genesis 48:5), "And now your two sons." Rather, our father Jacob foresaw that a descendant of Ephraim, namely Jeroboam son of Nebat the Ephraimite, would make two golden calves, as it is said (1 Kings 11:26), "And Jeroboam son of Nebat, an Ephraimite, took his stand." He would then say (1 Kings 12:28), "These are your gods, O Israel." Therefore, Jacob said, "Who are these?" And Joseph replied (Genesis 48:9), "These are my sons." What did Joseph do? He removed his crown from his head and released his belt (or "girdle") before Jacob, as it is said (Genesis 48:12), "And Joseph took them both." He said to him, "Do you see what sins they will commit?" Jacob answered, "I do not." Once he heard this, Joseph said to him (Genesis 48:9), "Bring them to me and I will bless them." Immediately Joseph took them both (Genesis 48:13), and Israel stretched out his right hand. When Joseph saw this, he was displeased, as it is said (Genesis 48:17), "And Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand." He said to him, "Do you think that I have no strength left in my old age? By your life, I still have as much strength as they do." But his father refused (Genesis 48:19)." "And from Menasheh fell [to] David, etc. (I Chronicles 12:20). However, his brother etc. (Genesis 48:19), this is Yehoshua who stands from Ephraim, as it says, "from the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea, son of Nun" (Numbers 13:8), who erected the wall, and all the nations of the world look and see. Therefore, "and his seed shall become a multitude of nations" (Genesis 48:19). The Holy One Blessed be He said, "I have seen how good Ephraim is; take them on my arms" (Hosea 11:3). When The Holy One Blessed be He said said, "Bring them to me" (Genesis 48:9), I was there and revealed a mystery to Jacob about Ephraim and Jeroboam, although they did not know that I had healed them (Hosea 11:3). Ephraim, the beloved son, is dear to me.

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:49). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]….” – this is the offering that he presented in the name of Jacob, who had him precede Manasseh, and in the name of Joseph, who, because of his love, Jacob blessed him all those blessings, just as it says: “He blessed Joseph and said: The God [before whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked…]” (Genesis 48:15), and it says: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh…” (Genesis 48:20). “Dish [kaarat]” – this is Jacob; do not read it as kaarat, but rather, as akeret, who uprooted [akar] the right hand from Manasseh in favor of Ephraim. “Silver” – after, “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20); what he said to Joseph: “His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know; he too shall become a people…” (Genesis 48:19). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – corresponding to the one hundred and thirty words that there are from “he laid it on Ephraim’s head” (Genesis 48:14) until “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – this is Joseph, who was cast away [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “One” – as he was king in Egypt, just as it says: “One of the people (Avimelekh said this referring to himself.) almost lay [with your wife]” (Genesis 26:10). Likewise it says: “Joseph was the ruler over the land…” (Genesis 42:6). “Silver” – after “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver,” as due to his wisdom he was privileged to achieve kingship, just as it says: “After God has disclosed all this to you.… You will be in charge of my house…” (Genesis 41:39–40). “Seventy shekels in the sacred shekel” – as Gabriel came and added one letter from the name of the Holy One blessed be He to his name and taught him seventy languages, as it is stated: “He established it as a precept for Joseph [bihosef] (He added a heh, changing Joseph [Yosef] to Yehosef.) when he went out over Egypt; I learned a language I had not known” (Psalms 81:6), as were it not so, the Egyptians would not have accepted Joseph to rule over them. “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” – Jacob and Joseph were both full-fledged righteous men, and the two of them resembled one another. This accords with what Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph” (Genesis 37:2). It should have said nothing other than: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Reuben.” Why is it stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”? It is to teach you that Joseph resembled his father in every respect. Just as Jacob was born circumcised, so too, Joseph was born circumcised. Just as this one, his mother was barren, so too, that one, his mother was barren. Just as this one, his mother suffered from the pain of her pregnancy, so too that one, his mother suffered during birth. Just as this one, his mother bore two, so too that one, his mother bore two. Just as this one, his brother seeks to kill him, this one, too, his brothers seek to kill him. This one, his brother hates [soneh] him, and that one, likewise. This one is a shepherd and that one is a shepherd. This one is hated [nistam] and that one is hated. (See Genesis 27:41, 49:23.) This one was stolen from twice: “Stolen in the day and stolen at night” (Genesis 31:39); that one, there is a double expression of stealing: “For I was abducted [gunov gunavti] [from the land of the Hebrews]” (Genesis 40:15). This one was blessed with ten blessings, (See Genesis 27:28–29.) and that one was blessed with ten blessings. (See Deuteronomy 33:13–17.) This one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel, and that one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel. This one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel, and that one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel. This one begot children outside of the Land of Israel, and that one begot children outside of the Land of Israel. This one, angels accompanied him, and that one, angels accompanied him. (A midrash says that when Joseph went to his brothers at the behest of his father, three angels accompanied him.) This one ascended to greatness by means of a dream (See Genesis 28:10–16.) and that one ascended to greatness by means of a dream. This one, his father-in-law’s household was blessed on his account, and that one, his father-in-law’s (According to Bereshit Rabba 86:3, Joseph’s father-in-law Potifera was Potifar.) household was blessed on his account. This one descended to Egypt, and that one descended to Egypt. This one ended the famine and that one ended the famine. (See Bereshit Rabba 89:9.) This one administered an oath to his son, and that one administered an oath to his brothers. This one died in Egypt, and that one died in Egypt. This one was embalmed, and that one was embalmed. This one, his bones ascended, and that one, his bones ascended. Because Joseph resembled his father, that is why it is stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”; and that is why it is stated: “Both of them full…” – regarding Jacob and Joseph. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:50). “One…ladle [kaf]” – it corresponds to the palm of his right hand, which he placed on Ephraim’s head. Why does it call it “one”? It is because it is more significant than the left. “Gold…ten shekels” – it corresponds to the ten words that there are from: “Israel extended his right hand” (Genesis 48:14) until “and he was the younger” (Genesis 48:14). “Filled with incense” – Jacob saw this matter through the divine spirit, that Ephraim was worthy for him to place his right hand on his head. Likewise it says: “Guiding [sikel] his hands, as Manasseh was the first born” (Genesis 48:14). His hands were guided [hiskilu] by the divine spirit, just as it says: “Maskil of Eitan the Ezraḥite” (Psalms 89:1). (This is a psalm stated by Eitan the Ezraḥite with divine guidance.) “One young bull, one ram, one sheep in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:51). “One young [ben bakar] bull” – corresponding to Abraham, as it is stated: “Abraham ran to the cattle [habakar]” (Genesis 18:7). “One ram” – corresponding to Isaac, in whose regard it is written: “[Abraham…] took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son” (Genesis 22:13). “One sheep” – corresponding to Jacob, in whose regard it is written: “Jacob separated the sheep” (Genesis 30:40). Why did he sacrifice these three kinds of burnt offerings? It corresponds to the three patriarchs, corresponding to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “Let my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, be called upon them” (Genesis 48:16). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:52). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Elishama son of Amihud” (Numbers 7:53). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to Joseph, as it is written: “They slaughtered a goat” (Genesis 37:31). Why did he sacrifice this corresponding to Joseph? It is because when Jacob blessed them with the name of the three patriarchs, likewise, he blessed them with the name of Joseph and made them dependent upon him, as it is stated: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the two blessings that he blessed them: the former, “[may the angel…] bless the lads” (Genesis 48:16), and the latter, “by you Israel shall bless….” “Five rams, [five goats, five lambs]” – three species, corresponding to three generations that Joseph saw for Ephraim, who were attributed to Joseph, and they were patrilineal houses, as it is stated: “Joseph saw great-grandchildren from Ephraim” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise it says: “These are the sons of Ephraim by their families: Of Shutelaḥ.… And these are the sons of Shutelaḥ: Of Eran…” (Numbers 26:35–36). Ephraim, Shutelaḥ, Eran, these are three sons from three generations. Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five words (In the Hebrew phrase.) of “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20), as it is from there that Ephraim merited to present his offering first. “This was the offering…” – because he presented the offering in this order, the Holy One blessed be He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Elishama….”

“And to rule during the day and at night, and to divide between the light and the darkness, and God saw that it was good” (Genesis 1:18). “And to rule during the day and at night” – Rabbi Ilfa said: If this is referring to the lights, is it not already stated: “The greater light to rule the day”? Genesis 1:16). Why, then, does the verse state: “And to rule during the day and at night”? Rather, it is referring to the righteous, who exert control over the body that was created to illuminate during the day and the body that was created to illuminate at night. That is what is written: “The sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance against their enemies. Is it not written in the book of the upright?” (Joshua 10:13). What is the book of the upright? It is the book of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. (Genesis.) Why is it called the book of the upright? It is as it is written: “Let me die the death of the upright” (Numbers 23:10). (Where “upright” alludes to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.) Rabbi Ḥalafta applied it [this lesson] to here: “And to rule during the day and at night.” (As Rabbi Ilfa just said.) Rabbi Ḥanin in the name of Rabbi Shmuel applied it to the end of the book: “However, his younger brother [Ephraim] will be greater than he [Manasseh]” (Genesis 48:19). Is it possible to say this? (Manasseh’s descendants were more numerous than those of Ephraim (Numbers 26:34–37).) Rather, this refers Joshua, who would descend from him [Ephraim], who would cause the orbs of the sun and the moon, which rule from one end of the world to the other, to stand still. (And in that sense Ephraim was greater than Manasseh.) Rabbi Ḥanan in the name of Shmuel applied it to the end of the Torah, [where it is said of Joseph]: “A firstborn bull is his majesty…[he will gore the peoples together at the ends of the earth]” (Deuteronomy 33:17). Is it possible? (Is it possible that a king would arise from Joseph that would defeat kings throughout the world? No such king is recorded.) Rather, this is Joshua, who would descend from him, and who would cause the orbs of the sun and the moon, which rule from one end of the world to the other, to stand still. (Thereby becoming known to everyone in the world. ) This is as Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: The book of Deuteronomy was like a standard for Joshua. When the Holy One blessed be He appeared to him, he found him sitting with the book of Deuteronomy in his hand. He said to him: ‘“Be strong” Joshua, “be courageous” Joshua, “this book of the Torah shall not depart…”’ (Joshua 1:6–8). He took him and showed him to the orb of the sun. He [Joshua] said to it: ‘Just as I have not been still from [reading] this [book], so, you shall stand still before me.’ Thereupon, “The sun stood still, and the moon stopped” (Joshua 10:13). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: He said to it: ‘Wayward slave, are you not the acquired possession of my ancestor [Joseph]? Did my ancestor not see you in a dream: “Behold, the sun and the moon…[were prostrating themselves to me]”?’ (Genesis 37:9). Thereupon, “the sun stood still, and the moon [stopped].”

“God said to him: I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and an assembly of nations will be from you, and kings will emerge from your loins” (Genesis 35:11). “God said to him: I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply” – Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Yitzḥak: I used to say: Reuben was already out. Simeon was already out. Benjamin had already emerged from his loins and was still in his mother’s womb. (He used to wonder who this blessing referred to, given that Jacob’s sons were all born except for Benjamin, and Rachel was already pregnant with him, such that he had already emerged from Jacob’s loins. ) Then I said: “A nation” – this is Benjamin; “and an assembly of nations” – this is Manasseh and Ephraim, as it is written: “His descendants will be a plenitude of the nations” (Genesis 48:19). Rabbi Berekhya, Rabbi Ḥelbo, and Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman: “And kings will emerge from your loins” – this is Yerovam and Yehu. The Rabbis say: Is it possible that Avner was a righteous man and he disputed that the kingdom [belonged to] the house of David? It is that he expounded a midrash, and crowned Ish Boshet. (See II Samuel 2:8–9. ) That is what is written: “And kings will emerge from your loins” – this is Saul and Ish Boshet. What did they see that led them to draw near and ostracize in the case of the concubine in Giva? (See Judges chap. 20–21. ) It is, rather, that they read a verse and ostracized them, and read a verse and immediately welcomed them. They read a verse and ostracized them: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be like Reuben and Simeon for me” (Genesis 48:5). (They felt justified in ostracizing the tribe of Benjamin because Manasseh and Ephraim counted as two tribes, such that there would be twelve tribes even without Benjamin. ) They read a verse and welcomed them: “A nation and an assembly of nations will be from you.” (As stated above, this refers to Benjamin as well as Manasseh and Ephraim, and therefore they welcomed Benjamin back and cancelled his ostracization. )

“Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, and it displeased him; he supported his father’s hand, to remove it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh” (Genesis 48:17). “Joseph saw that his father was placing…” – Rabbi Berekhya said: The hand that overcame one-third of the world, (See Bereshit Rabba 68:12.) you are seeking to move it? “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn; place your right hand upon his head. His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know; he too will become a people, and he too will be great; however, his younger brother will be greater than he, and his descendants will be the plenitude of nations” (Genesis 48:18–19). “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father.… His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know” – I know the incident of Reuben and Bilha and the incident of Judah and Tamar; (I know that they all acted with pure intentions (Yefe To’ar).) if matters that were not revealed to you were revealed to me, matters that were revealed to you, all the more so. “He too will become a people, and he too will be great” – is it possible that it will be so? (The continuation of the verse states that Ephraim would be “the plenitude of nations.” The midrash asks: Is it possible that one tribe would be so numerous?) Rather, this is Joshua, who stopped the orb of the sun and the moon, which have dominion from one end of the world to the other end. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Bad slave, are you not the purchase of my father… (Joshua said to the sun: ‘You prostrated yourself to my father Joseph in his dream; therefore you must obey me’ (see Bereshit Rabba 84:11). )

(Jos. 10, 13) And the sun stood still .........written in the book of Yashar. What is the book of Yashar? Said R. Chiya b. Aba in the name of R. Jochanan: "This refers to (Genesis) the book in which the birth of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who are named Jesharim (the upright), as it is said (Num. 23, 10) Let me die the death of the righteous Jesharim, etc. And where is it hinted [that such a miracle will occur with Joshua]? From (Gen. 48, 19) And his seed shall become a multitude of nations, i.e., when shall his seed become a multitude of nations? At the time when Joshua stopped the sun. (Jos. 10, 13) And the sun stood still in the midst of the heavens, and hastened not to go down about a whole day. How many hours? Said R. Joshua b. Levi: "Twenty-four hours; it went six [hours] and stopped six, went six, and stopped six, the entire episode lasting a whole day." R. Elazar said: "Thirty-six hours, it went six [hours] and stopped twelve, it went six, and stopped twelve; its stopping time was equal to a whole day [24 hours]." R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "Forty-eight, it went six and stopped twelve, went six and stopped twenty-four, for it is said, And it hastened not to go down about a whole day." According to the above, they differ in the additional hours of that day.We are taught in a Baraitha: Just as the sun stopped for Joshua, so also did it stop for Moses. An objection was raised from (Ib. ib. 14) And there was no day like that before it or after it. If you wish, in the time of Moses it stopped for fewer hours, or if you wish, it may be said that in Moses' time there were no hailstones mentioned, as the passage says (Ib. ib. 11) And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, etc., that the Lord cast down great stones, and said: To teach the sons of Judah the bow, Behold it is written in the book of Yashar. What does Yashar mean? Said R. Chiya b. Aba in the name of R. Jochanan: "This refers to Genesis [as said above]. And where is it hinted [that Judah will be fighters]? It is written (Gen. 49, 8) Thy hand shall be on the neck of thy enemies. Which is the weapon that needs the hand against the neck? It is the how," R. Elazar, however, maintains that the book of Yashar refers to Deuteronomy. And why is it named Yashar? Because there is a passage (6, 18) And thou shalt do that which is right (Yashar) and good in the eyes of the Lord. And where is the intimation of this? (33, 7) Let the power of his hands. And which is the weapon for which both hands are needed? It is the bow." R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "It refers to the book of Judges. And why is it called Yashar? Because therein is written (17, 6) Every man did what seemed right (Yashar) in his eyes. And where is it intimated [in the Biblical text]? (3, 2) To teach them war. And what is the weapon for which teaching is necessary? This is the bow. And whence do we know that this refers to Judah? The passage reads (Ib. 1, 1) Who shall go up for us first against them? And the Lord said: 'Judah shall go up.' "

“I again saw under the sun that the race is not to the swift, and the war is not to the valiant; also bread is not to the wise, and also wealth is not to the clever, and also favor is not to the knowledgeable, but rather, time and chance befalls them all” (Ecclesiastes 9:11). “That the race is not to the swift” – this is Jacob our patriarch; yesterday: “Jacob lifted his feet [and went to the land of the children of the east]” (Genesis 29:1), and today it is written: “He gathered his feet onto the bed [and expired]” (Genesis 49:33). “And the war is not to the valiant” – this is Jacob; yesterday, “he rolled the stone off the mouth of the well” (Genesis 29:10), and Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Like a person removing the stopper from the mouth of a flask, (This demonstrates Jacob’s great strength, as the stone was heavy enough that generally multiple people had to lift it together (see Genesis 29:8).) and today, “the sons of Israel transported Jacob their father” (Genesis 46:5), his body, and he could not be carried even [sitting] in a litter. (Jacob was so weak that his sons had to carry him themselves as they traveled.) “Also bread is not to the wise” – this is Jacob; yesterday, “Jacob sacrificed an offering on the mountain…[and called his brethren to eat bread] and they ate bread” (Genesis 31:54). Were they his brethren? He had one brother, and if only he had buried him. (His only brother, Esau, wanted to kill him; it would have been better for Jacob had Esau died.) Were they not his sons? Rather, once they reached his shoulders he likened them to himself and called them brethren. Today, “Return and purchase a little food for us…” (Genesis 43:2). (Jacob asked his sons to return to Egypt to purchase food. Instead of him providing for them, he asked them to provide food for him.) “And also wealth is not to the clever” – this is Jacob; “the man became exceedingly prosperous [vayifrotz]” (Genesis 30:43). Rabbi Simon teaches in the name of Rabbi Shimon that he had a microcosm of the World to Come, as it is stated: “The one who breaks through [haporetz] will have ascended before them” (Micah 2:13). (Just as the Messiah, the subject of that verse, will break the laws of nature, God broke the laws of nature in causing Jacob’s flocks to multiply in order to grant him wealth.) But today, “Joseph sustained his father and his brothers…” (Genesis 47:12). “And also favor is not to the knowledgeable” – this is Jacob. Yesterday, “I know my son, I know” (Genesis 48:19). I know about the incident of Judah and Tamar, the incident of Reuben and Bilha. If the matters that were not revealed to you, were revealed to me, the matters that were revealed to you, all the more so. But today, he said to him: “If I have found favor in your eyes…do not bury me in Egypt (Genesis 47:29). (Jacob was more knowledgeable than Joseph, as indicated in Genesis 48:19, yet he had to ask for Joseph’s favor so that he could be buried in the land of Israel.) Another matter, “the race is not to the swift” – this is Asael, as it is stated: “Asael was light on his feet, like one of the antelopes…” (II Samuel 2:18). How was his lightness manifest? He would run over the awns of the stalks and they would not break. Yesterday, “Asael was light on his feet,” and today, “Avner struck him with the back of the spear” (II Samuel 2:23). “And the war is not to the valiant” – this is Avner, as it is written: “Are you not a man? Who is your equal in Israel…” (I Samuel 26:15). As Rabbi Asi said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: It is easier for a person to move a six-cubit-wide wall than one of Avner’s legs; but today, “shall Avner die the death of a scoundrel?” (II Samuel 3:33). (David said this after Yoav tricked Avner and killed him.) “Also bread is not to the wise” – this is Solomon. Yesterday, “Solomon’s daily provision was thirty kor of fine flour and sixty kor of flour” (I Kings 5:2), and it is written: “Ten fattened bulls…” (I Kings 5:3). Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Likewise, each and every day, and likewise each and every one of his wives would prepare a meal for him, under the impression that he would dine with her. But today, “this was my portion from all my toil” (Ecclesiastes 2:10). There is one who says: [All he had was] his bowl, there is one who says: [All he had was] his walking stick, and there is one who says: [All he had was] his belt. (This is an allusion to the midrash (Kohelet Rabba 2:10) that Solomon was displaced from his throne and made to wander as a commoner with almost nothing.) “And also wealth is not to the clever” – this is Job. Yesterday, “his livestock was seven thousand sheep…” (Job 1:3), “and his livestock spread [paratz] in the land” (Job 1:10). Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Ḥanina said: He breached [paratz] the boundaries of the world. Everywhere, the way of the world is that wolves kill the goats; however, with Job, the goats would kill the wolves. But today, “pity me, pity me, you are my friends…” (Job 19:21). “And also favor is not to the knowledgeable” – this is Joshua. Rabbi Aḥva son of Rabbi Zeira said: There are two matters that Joshua spoke before Moses, but they did not find favor in his eyes, and these are: One regarding the appointment of the elders, and one in the incident of the [Golden] Calf. In the appointment of the elders, as it is written: “My lord Moses, incarcerate them [kela’em]” (Numbers 11:28); he said to him: Put an end to them [kalem] and remove them from the world. “Moses said to him: Are you zealous on my behalf?” (Numbers 11:29). [Moses] said to him: ‘Joshua, am I jealous of you? (According to rabbinic tradition, Joshua’s statement to Moses about two elders, Eldad and Medad, was made after the latter prophesied that Moses would die and Joshua would lead the nation in the land of Israel (Sanhedrin 17a). That is the backdrop of this midrash, in which Joshua demanded that these elders be punished for their lack of respect toward Moses, and Moses responded that he was not insulted by their prophecy (Rabbi David Luria).) If only my son could be like you, if only all Israel could be like you, “would that all the people of the Lord would be prophets” (Numbers 11:29).’ And one regarding the [Golden] Calf, as it is stated: “Joshua heard the sound of the people in their uproar [and he said to Moses: There is a sound of war in the camp]” (Exodus 32:17). Moses said to him: ‘A person who is destined to assert authority over six hundred thousand [men] does not know to distinguish between one sound and another sound? “It is not the sound of a cry of strength [gevura]” (Exodus 32:18),’ as it is stated: “Israel prevailed [vegavar]” (Exodus 17:11); ‘“and it is not the sound of a cry of weakness” (Exodus 32:18),’ as it is stated: “Joshua weakened [Amalek]” (Exodus 17:13); ‘“the sound of a cry, I hear” (Exodus 32:18).’ Rabbi Asi said: It is the sound of praise of idol worship, I hear. Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Asi: You do not have any generation that did not take one ounce of the calf. (The punishment for this sin is distributed over all the generations.)

למטה יוסף, למטה מנשה, “from the tribe of Joseph, the tribe of M’nashe; here “M’nashe is mentioned first, as the representative of that tribe who would prove to be one who slandered the Holy Land together with the majority of the spies, whereas Joshua, the representative of Ephrayim, the other half of the tribe of Joseph, although the favourite of Yaakov (Genesis 48,19) when he blessed the children of Joseph, was not lumped together with the other spies. (Compare Numbers 1,10, 32, and Numbers 26,28)

THE TEN THOUSANDS OF EPHRAIM. As in the words of Jacob. (Who gave Joseph the blessing of many children. See Gen. 49:25.)

For example, there is a difference between the comparative that comes with the letter מ (אחיו הקטן יגדל ממנו - his younger brother shall be greater than he) (Genesis 48:19.) , and the superlative that comes with with the letter ה (היפה בנשים - fairest among women (Songs of Songs 1:8.) ) (unless the letter מ comes on the word כל - גבוה מכל העם - he was higher than any of the people) (1 Samuel 9:2.) . Thus, when it is written הגדול מאחיו (highest among his brethren) (Leviticus 21:10.) , it should have said הגדול באחיו. The letter מ gives it a second meaning - גדלהו משל אחיו (if he does not have personal wealth, he should be made great from the property of his brethren) (Babylonian Talmud Horayot 9a.) .

וירא יוסף לאפרים בני שלשים, “Joseph lived long enough to see three generations of his son Ephrayim.” The true meaning is that whereas Joseph saw three generations from his son Menashe, he saw four generations from his son Ephrayim (Ephrayim plus his great grandson). This is based on the word בני being a possessive of the word שלשים. [However, according to the cantillation, the tipcha under the word בני means it belongs to the word אפרים, Ed.] There is some allusion to this fertility of Ephrayim in Yaakov’s blessing who foresaw greater things for Ephrayim than for Menashe. Concerning the latter Yaakov had said that “he too would develop into a nation,” the implication being that it would take him longer, i.e. more years to do so The word גם in the line גם בני מכיר בן מנשה indicate that Menashe also lived in Joseph’s home; however, seeing that Joseph loved Menashe better than Ephrayim, the Torah mentions the fact that Menashe’s grandchildren were born on Joseph’s knees rather than those of Ephrayim. The מכיר named here was actually Gilead, son of Machir, son of Menashe. He was the grandfather of Tzelofchod (Numbers 27,1). The Torah wanted to show that Joseph raised righteous people in his own home, people who in turn produced daughters of outstanding caliber such as the daughters of Tzelofchod.

M’LEIATHCHA V’DIM’ACHA’ (OF THE FULNESS OF THY HARVEST, AND OUT OF THE OUTFLOW OF THY PRESSES) THOU SHALT NOT DELAY TO OFFER. We find the word m’leiah with reference to seed, thus: lest there be forfeited ‘ham’leiah’ (the fulness) of the seed which thou hast sown, (Deuteronomy 22:9.) and again: ‘v’kamleiah’ (and as the fulness) of the winepress, (Numbers 18:27.) meaning wine and oil, just as it is said, and the vats shall overflow with wine and oil. (Joel 2:24.) It appears to me in connection with these terms, that fruits of the field and vineyard are called t’vuah [of the root bo — come in] because the farmers “bring” the whole crop in together to the homes. It is also called asif (the ingathering): ‘osef’ (the ingathering) shall not come; (Isaiah 32:10.) and the feast of ‘ha’asif’ (the ingathering). (Further, 23:16.) This is why produce is called m’leiah (fulness), because a gathering-together into one place of a mass of material or people is called milui (fulness): though there be called forth against him ‘m’lo’ (a multitude of) shepherds; (Isaiah 31:4.) even they are ‘malei’ (in full) cry after you; (Jeremiah 12:6.) together against me ‘yitmalo’un’ (Job 16:10.) — they gather themselves and come. Similarly, and his seed shall become ‘m’lo’ nations (Genesis 48:19.) — means an assembly and multitude of nations. It is further possible that produce is called m’leiah (full) as a substitute term for a blessing — that the granaries shall be full of corn, and the vats shall overflow with wine and oil, (Joel 2:24.) and the reaper fills his hands, and the binder of sheaves his bosom, (See Psalms 129:7.) and gathers grapes in the vintage. For when their portion is cursed (Job 24:18.) Scripture says, Let them be as the grass upon the housetops, which withereth afore it springeth up; wherewith the reaper filleth not his hand, nor he that bindeth sheaves, his bosom, (Psalms 129:6-7.) but when their portion is blessed, it is called m’leiah (full). And in that case dim’acha [literally: “your tear”] is an allusion to wine and oil, a usage borrowed from dim’ath ha’ayin (tear of the eye), because the drops from the grape and olive resemble the tear of the eye. Or it may be that all moisture that falls in globules — even drops of water — are called dim’ah (tear), such as: and mine eyes shall run down ‘dim’ah’ (with tear), (Jeremiah 13:17.) and it is not a term used only for tears. And the intention of the verse is, that when you gather in the crops of the field, and the granaries will be full of corn, (Joel 2:24.) and you press the grapes and olives to extract their juice, and the vats shall overflow with wine and oil, (Joel 2:24.) you should not delay them in your possession, but right at the beginning you are to give your tithings to Me, just as He said, The first fruits of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil… shalt thou give him — [i.e., the priest]. (Deuteronomy 18:4.) In the opinion of our Rabbis, (Mechilta here on the Verse.) of blessed memory, thou shalt not delay means that: “you are not to set aside last what should be first, [and set aside first what should be last].” Now here He did not explain [the correct order of the gifts], for here He mentions the commandments in a general way, and afterwards He explained them in detail. The Rabbis arranged the order of the gifts as follows: first-fruits, the heave-offering, the First Tithe, and the Second Tithe. (The first-fruits are brought to the Sanctuary and then given to the priest. The heave-offering is given to the priest, the First Tithe to the Levite, and the Second Tithe is eaten by the owner in Jerusalem. See “The Commandments,” Vol. II, pp. 145-146, for full discussion of this commandment.) This order they established on the basis of the following interpretation with reference to these gifts, just as we have been taught: (Terumoth 3:7.) “How do we know that first-fruits come before the heave-offering, being that this one is called by Scripture terumah (heave-offering) and reshith (the first), and the other is also called terumah and reshith? (Deuteronomy 12:6 speaks of first-fruits as terumath yedchem (the heave-offering of your hand); they are called reshith in this Scriptural section (further 23:19). The heave-offering is called terumah in Numbers 18:8, and is called reshith in Deuteronomy 18:4.) First-fruits have priority because they are the first [to grow] of all produce. The heave-offering comes before the First Tithe, because it is called reshith (the first), (Deuteronomy 12:6 speaks of first-fruits as terumath yedchem (the heave-offering of your hand); they are called reshith in this Scriptural section (further 23:19). The heave-offering is called terumah in Numbers 18:8, and is called reshith in Deuteronomy 18:4.) and the First Tithe comes before the Second Tithe because it contains in it reshith” [since the Levite who receives the First Tithe must give a tenth of it as terumah to the priest]. Onkelos translated m’leiathcha v’dim’acha: “bikurach (your first fruit), v’dim’ach.” (Onkelos thus left the Hebrew word v’dim’acha untranslated. As explained further it is a term denoting the priest’s share of the produce — in other words, the terumah [or the heave-offering]. According to Onkelos the verse thus refers to the first-fruits and the heave-offering.) And Rashi explained: “M’leiathcha — this means the duty which falls upon you when your crop becomes fully ripened, and it refers to the first-fruits. V’dim’acha means the heave-offering. But I do not know what the term dim’a means.” It is similarly stated in the Mechilta: (Mechilta here on the Verse.) “M’leiathcha means the first-fruits which are taken from the full crop, and dim’acha means the heave-offering.” Perhaps in the same way that according to the Rabbis the first-fruits are called in this verse m’leiah (fulness), because they are taken from the full crop, so the heave-offering is called dim’ah [literally: “tear” or “outflow,” as explained above], because it is set aside from wine and oil, [as liquids], not from the fruit. Scripture mentioned only these two kinds of produce, [wine and oil], in order to hint at the law that the heave-offering only has to be set aside from them when in the form of wine and oil, there being no obligation upon the owner to anticipate and set it aside when they are still grapes and olives. Thus He only mentioned these commandments here by way of allusion, as if to say, “Be careful to keep these commandments about which I will command you further,” in a similar manner to that which He said above, and I will appoint thee a place whither he may flee. (Above, 21:13.) This was in order to write down these commandments in the book of the covenant (Further, 24:7.) which He mentions in a subsequent section, and Scripture explains them all again in another place, [each one in detail].

Is it not written [in the Seifer Ha Yoshor.] This subject is recorded in the Torah, (What is the Seifer Ha Yoshor that is mentioned in this verse? We do not have any book that is called by that name. Rashi identifies the Seifer Ha Yoshor with Seifer Bereishis. It is so called because Yoshor means upright, and this refers to our righteous forefathers, Avrohom, Yitchok and Yaakov.) for Yaakov had said to Yosef, regarding the descendents of Ephraim “The fame of his descendants will fill the nations.” (Bereishis 48:19.) When did this occur? On the day the sun stood still for Yehoshua, the entire world was filled with the fame of Yehoshua. (Yehoshua was a descendant of the tribe of Ephraim.) The sun stood still half-way in the sky (It stood still half-way through its orbit in the sky.) and did not hasten to set for a complete day.

ראה ראיתי את עני עמי, “I have indeed seen the plight of My people.” A reference to the righteous ones among them who groaned and sighed over the sins of their generation and their resulting plight, praying. In response to the prayer of these righteous people the angel answered out of the burning bush. The meaning of the words ראה ראיתי is “indeed I have seen, taken notice.” This construction is normal wherever the Torah employs a dual, duplicate construction. The reason for the duplication is as if to contradict someone who denies that G’d has seen what goes on. It is as if saying: ‘in spite of anything you think or say, I insist that you are wrong and I am right.” It is similar to Yaakov negating Joseph’s trying go correct the position of his hands when he was blessing Ephrayim and Menashe. At that time Yaakov simply said: “I know my son, I know.” (Genesis 48,19) The angel confirmed to Moses that in spite of G’d being aware of the Israelite’s problems and the fact that He was going to inflict numerous plagues on the Egyptians, the latter would not simply collapse in spite of all the plagues. My intention with the plagues is not to destroy the Egyptians and to leave the Israelites in their place, on their land, but I want to save the Israelites and to take them out of Egypt in order to settle them elsewhere.

When Joseph saw that his father was placing his right hand on Ephraim’s head, he thought it wrong; so he took hold of his father’s hand to move it from Ephraim’s head to Manasseh’s. “Not so, Father,” Joseph said to his father, “for the other is the firstborn; place your right hand on his head.” But his father objected, saying, “I know, my son, I know.” Genesis 48:17–19

Yet, though Jacob reassured Joseph that Manasseh would not be forgotten, he insisted on granting the superior blessing to the younger Ephraim: “He too shall become a people, and he too shall be great. Yet his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his offspring shall be plentiful enough for nations” (Genesis 48:19).

Israel [Jacob] stretched out his right hand and placed it on Ephraim’s head, though he was the younger…[Jacob] guided his hand deliberately.…When Joseph saw this, it seemed wrong to him.…But his father insisted and said, “I know it, my son, I know it. [Manasseh] too will become a tribe; he, too, will attain greatness. However, [Ephraim] will become greater than he, and his descendants will become the fullness of the tribes.” Genesis 48:14–19

[90] What led this same Jacob, when Joseph brought to him his two sons, the elder Manasseh and the younger Ephraim, to cross his hands and place his right hand on Ephraim the younger son and his left hand on Manasseh the elder; and when Joseph was distressed by it and imagined that his father had made an unintentional mistake in so placing his hands, to say it was no error, but “I know, my child, I know, this one too shall be a people, this one too shall be exalted, but his younger brother shall be greater than he”? (Gen. 48:19).

The Gemara asks: And where is it alluded to in Genesis that the sun would stand still for Joshua? The verse states in reference to Ephraim, who was Joshua’s ancestor: “And his seed shall become a multitude of nations” (Genesis 48:19). The Gemara asks: When will he become a multitude of nations? He became a multitude of nations at the time when the sun stood in place for Joshua, as it is written: “And the sun stayed in the midst of heaven, and hastened not to go down for an entire day” (Joshua 10:13).

His father refused, and he said, I know my son, I know. He too will become a people, he too will become great; however his younger brother will be greater than he, and [the fame] of his descendants will fill [rule] the nations.

But his father was not willing, and said, I know, my son, I know that he is the firstborn, and also that he will be a great people, and will also be multiplied; yet will his younger brother be greater than he, and his sons be greater among the nations.

Genesis 48,20. “He blessed them on that day, saying: ‎may G’d make you like Ephrayim and Menashe; he positioned ‎Ephrayim (the younger) in front of Menashe.” Before ‎commenting on this verse, let us first explain a puzzling passage ‎in the Talmud Megillah, 15. The Talmud invites the reader ‎to note that G’d’s way of doing (relating to) things is radically ‎different from the way human beings do (relate to) things. A ‎human being is in the habit of putting the pot on the stove ‎before pouring water into it, whereas G’d first pours water into it ‎before putting it on the stove to boil. The Talmud “illustrates” ‎this by quoting Jeremiah 10,13 ‎לקול תתו המון מים בשמים‎, “when He ‎makes His voice heard there is rumbling of water in the heavens.” ‎We have explained this in connection with Exodus 15,26 ‎כל המחלה ‏אשר שמתי במצרים לא אשים עליך כי אני ה' רופאך‎, “all the diseases that I ‎brought upon Egypt I will not bring upon you, for I am the Lord ‎your Healer.” We derive the rule that G’d arranges for the ‎recovery before He brings on the plague from the above verse, ‎where G’d describes Himself as our Healer prior to our having ‎been smitten with any disease. When G’d brings on troubles to ‎‎“good” Jews, the reason is only in order to make the victim aware ‎of Who it is Who orchestrates his being saved from the ‎consequences of disease or other troubles. Our author ‎understands the word ‎מחלה‎ as an activity, not a state of being ‎passively sick, as is the customary translation [The first ‎letter ‎מ‎ is indicative of the person or cause who brings on the ‎disease. Ed.] In other words, G’d is saying that the ‎חולי‎, ‎disease, that He brought upon the Egyptians, He will not bring ‎upon the Israelites as even if the Israelites were to be struck by ‎disease, the purpose would be a constructive one, namely to ‎teach them Who will save them. In order for man, especially the ‎Jewish man, to become a vessel fit to benefit fully from G’d’s ‎kindness, largesse, etc., this vessel first has to undergo ‎preparatory stages. Just as if one wants to convert a small vessel ‎into a big vessel one first has to break up the small vessel, so G’d, ‎in order to achieve the proper influence on the human being He ‎desires to elevate, i.e. to make a “bigger” human being out of him, ‎has to afflict him first with ‎חולי‎, a disease, or its equivalent. In the ‎above quoted parable with the pot and the water to be boiled in ‎it, the disease is called “the pot,“ and the “water” represents the ‎deeds of loving kindness bestowed on the individual or ‎community by G’d. In other words, G’d first supplies the materials ‎that will refine the human beings, and only then will He bestow ‎the gifts testifying to His loving kindness, when the recipient will ‎not let those gifts go to waste. The result will be a more mature ‎and insightful personality.‎ The foregoing introduction will help the reader understand ‎that the Torah writing that Yaakov placed Ephrayim, although ‎the younger brother, in front of his older brother Menashe, was ‎not another example of Yaakov showing preference for one of his ‎grandchildren at the expense of the other grandchild, as he had ‎done once when he showed preference for his son Joseph with ‎almost tragic and irreversible consequences. There was no need ‎for the Torah to repeat this aspect, as it had already told us that ‎Yaakov had been adamant in placing his right hand on Ephrayim, ‎the younger of the brothers in verses 13-15. The Torah uses the ‎‎“names” of the two sons of Joseph to illustrate the point made in ‎the parable in the Talmud in Megillah 15.‎

וישם את אפרים לפני מנשה, “he positioned (in the blessing) the name of Ephrayim before the name of Menashe.” He had done so already in verse 5, before the sequence of the blessing had become an issue. By making a comparison with Reuven and Shimon in that order, his intention had been unmistakable.

וישם את אפרים לפני מנשה, “thus he placed Ephrayim ahead of Menashe.” When did this blessing and its order become fulfilled, historically? When you look at the consecration rites for the Tabernacle in the desert, in Numbers 7,48, you will find that the prince of Ephrayim presented his offering ahead of the tribe of Menashe, who did so only in verse 54 of that chapter. In this way the statement in Isaiah 44,26, that G–d fulfils the words of his servant, was fulfilled. (B’reshit Rabbah, 97,5)

BY THEE SHALL ISRAEL BLESS. All the Israelites. (Israel here doesn’t refer to Jacob but to all of Jacob’s descendants (Krinsky).)

AND HE SET EPHRAIM BEFORE MANASSEH. In the enunciation of the blessing. (Viz., “God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh.”)

ויברכם ביום ההוא לאמור, He blessed them on that day, saying, etc. The Torah means that Jacob gave the boys such a full measure of blessings that everybody said that the simplest way to bestow blessings on Jewish children in the future would be to mention that they should be as blessed as Ephrayim and Menashe were blessed by Jacob.

וישם את אפרים לפני מנשה, He placed Ephrayim ahead of Menashe. This is not to be understood literally. The Torah means that by mentioning Ephrayim ahead of Menashe Jacob had in effect given Ephrayim a measure of precedence over Menashe. What true Jewish father would reverse the formula that Jacob had used when he blessed his grandchildren? We still mention Ephrayim the younger of the two ahead of Menashe the firstborn when we bless our children.

בך יברך ישראל, “By you shall Israel bless:” Yaakov told Joseph that when Israel would bless its children they would hold up Joseph’s children as the models they hoped their own children would emulate. When blessing Jewish boys the father would invoke the names of Ephrayim and Menashe as the models he wished G’d to use when blessing his own children. וישם את אפרים לפני מנשה, “he placed Ephrayim ahead of Menashe.” The Torah means that in all the blessings Yaakov bestowed he always mentioned the name of Ephrayim before mentioning the name Menashe. He did so knowing full well that Ephrayim was the younger of the two as he had detected qualities in the character of Ephrayim which were superior to those of Menashe. It is also possible to interpret the words: “ahead of Menashe,” in a literal sense, i.e. Ephrayim stood in front of Menashe. In that event Yaakov would not have referred to Ephrayim’s superiority over Menashe. The words “in front of Menashe” would emphasize Menashe’s superiority, his being used as the term of reference. We find something similar in Genesis 44,14 where Yehudah is mentioned before Joseph and the Torah describes the brothers as prostrating themselves “before Him,” meaning Joseph, of course, seeing he was superior in stature to Yehudah though he was named last. If we accept this interpretation then the lesson in etiquette which Yaakov taught us on that occasion was that the older brother is to be treated respectfully because he is biologically senior. When a person places someone in front of a person of superior rank then this does not mean that the person so placed is superior but the very opposite is the case. This interpretation does not conflict with the fact that Yaakov foresaw a greater future for Ephrayim. On the contrary, precisely because in the future someone may attain a higher rank than his brother this is no excuse not to defer to his older brother when this future has not yet occurred.

ויברכם. He bestowed an additional blessing on them on the same day, saying: בך יברך ישראל, whenever an Israelite wants to bestow a blessing on his son, he will preface it with the words: ישימך אלוקים כאפרים ומנשה. “May the Lord make you to be like Ephrayim and Menashe.”

וישם את אפרים לפני מנשה, in this blessing too, Yaakov placed more emphasis on the recipient of the blessing being compared to Ephrayim, the younger of Joseph’s sons, by mentioning his name first. Even the choice of words כאפרים וכמנשה instead of כאפרים ומנשה, indicated clearly that Menashe was considered secondary in Yaakov’s blessing. He was considered the adjunct.

AND HE BLESSED THEM THAT DAY. The meaning of that day is that since Joseph had urged him to give Menasheh precedence, the verse declares that Jacob did not wish to remove his right hand from Ephraim’s head to that of Menasheh. Moreover, he expressly reiterated on that occasion, in Joseph’s presence, when he blessed them by saying, As Ephraim and Menasheh. And he put Ephraim before Menasheh in all his blessings.

BY THEE SHALL ISRAEL BLESS. Jacob addressed this to Joseph. It means that the nation of Israel will bless with your children and say to those being blessed, God make thee as Ephraim and Menasheh.

בך יברך ישראל, each Israelite his respective son.

וישם את אפרים לפני מנשה, he did this not physically, but by mentioning Ephrayim’s name in the blessing ahead of the name of Menashe. The expression (verb) שימה, or לשום respectively can be used with words (intangibles) as well as with people and tangible objects. A prominent example of it being applied to intangible concepts is Exodus 21,1 ואלה המשפטים אשר תשים לפניהם, “and these are the laws, judicial concepts, you are to place before them.” Or. In Deuteronomy 4,41 וזאת התורה אשר שם משה, “and this is the Torah which Moses placed, etc.” The reference was not to the Torah scroll, but to what was written in it. Also in Deuteronomy 31,19 the line שימה בפיהם, does not refer to something being placed in the mouth of the people, such as food, but it refers to the words in the written Torah being fed to the people as if food fed through their mouths.

בך יברך ישראל IN THEE SHALL ISRAEL BLESS — When one wishes to bless his sons he will bless them by reciting the formula with which they were blessed — a man will say to his son, “God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh.”

וישם את אפרים AND HE PUT EPHRAIM etc. — i.e. in the blessing he bestowed upon them he put Ephraim’s name before that of Manasseh, so giving him precedence over his brother when the Israelites encamped and marched beneath their banners in the wilderness (cf. Numbers 2:18 and Numbers 10:22), and when at the dedication of the altar by the princes of the tribes each brought his gifts (cf. Numbers 7:48 Numbers 7:54). (see Genesis Rabbah 97:5).

ביום ההוא: an jenem Tage ward zuerst ברכה ausgesprochen, die seitdem im Munde aller Kinder segnenden jüdischen Eltern lebt. Daher auch die beiden Worte voll und pathetisch auseinander gezogen: בך יברך וגו׳ .ויבָרֲכם לאמור : deine Kinder sollen so gesegnet werden, daß, wenn Väter in Israel ihre Kinder segnen wollen, sie keinen höheren Segen kennen mögen, als: Gott lasse dich wie Efrajim und Menasche werden.

He will bless them with their blessing and a person will say to his son... Since the term “Yisroel” means the people of Yisroel, which is a plural noun, why does it say ישימך, in the singular form? Thus Rashi adds, “And a person will say to his son...”

Insofar as his blessing was concerned. Ahead of Menasheh... [Rashi is explaining] that this was not a literal placing; Yaakov did not take Ephraim and put him in front of Menasheh. Rather, it was a placing [in order] of importance, that Ephraim comes first for the banners, etc.

He blessed them that day, saying: By you shall Israel bless their children, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh, and he placed Ephraim before Manasseh in the text of the blessing. 9 In practice as well, Manasseh was given secondary status, despite the fact that he was the firstborn.

ויברכם ביום ההוא, “He blessed them both on that day;” the words “on that day,” are important, seeing that Joseph pressured his father to place his right hand on Menashe and to bless him first. The Torah clearly shows that Yaakov resisted this pressure and did not want to remove his right hand from the head of Ephrayim. Not only that, but when Yaakov eventually pronounced the blessing, he made a point of naming Ephrayim first in his blessing so that when the parents of Jewish children would bless their children in the future they would always mention Ephrayim first when wishing that their children model themselves after these two sons of Joseph.

בך יברך ישראל, ”when the Jewish people bless their children they will do so by referring to you, Joseph, to your well turned out children.” They will express the fervent hope that their own children would turn out as successfully.

The beauty of the beard appears in nine features. And when the superior ointment of the thirteen founts of the beard of Atika Kadisha shines on this beard of Zeir Anpin, twenty-two features appear altogether. Everyone is then blessed above and below, and Israel Saba and Tevunah that is Zeir Anpin is blessed by it. The sign for it is, “By you (becha) shall Israel bless” (Bereshit 48:20), that is, Zeir Anpin that is called Israel will bless with the Kaf-Bet (22) spelling becha attributes. All the features of the beard were expounded upon in the Holy Gathering; they were all fashioned out of the attributes of Atika Kadisha. Here I wish to reveal that which has not been revealed there, to enter the world to come without shame.

May God make you like Ephraim and Manasseh. May God make you like Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah.

May G·d place you like Ephraim & like Menasheh. May G·d Bless you & Guard you. May G·d shine His Countenance upon you & bestow grace upon you. May G·d lift His Countenance to you & give you peace.

May God make you like Ephraim and Menashe.

May God make you as Ephraim and Menashe. Adonoy bless you and guard you. Adonoy shine His countenance upon you and be gracious unto you. Adonoy turn His countenance toward you and grant you peace. Adonoy is your guardian; Adonoy is your shelter at your right hand. For length of days and years of life and peace, will He add to you. Adonoy will guard you from all evil, He will preserve your soul.

“On the seventh day…” – that is what is written: “The words of the wise are like goads, and like implanted nails are the collectors of wisdom; they were given from one shepherd” (Ecclesiastes 12:11). It is taught: there was an incident involving Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka and Rabbi Elazar Ḥisma, who went to greet Rabbi Yehoshua in Pekiin. Rabbi Yehoshua said to them: ‘What novel idea was taught today in the study hall?’ They said to him: ‘We are your students and we drink from your water.’ He said to them: ‘Nevertheless, it is impossible for there to be a study hall without a novel idea.’ He asked them: ‘Whose week was it?’ ‘It was the week of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya.’ (See Berakhot 28a, where the arrangement that had Rabban Gamliel serving at the head of the yeshiva three weeks a month and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya one week is explained.) ‘On what was the lecture today?’ They said to him: ‘It was regarding the portion of assembly.’ ‘What did he expound in its regard?’ ‘“Assemble the people, the men and the women and the children” (Deuteronomy 31:12). If men come to learn, and women come to hear, why the children? It is in order to reward those who bring them.’ He said to them: ‘You had this fine pearl in your hands, and you sought to conceal it from me?’ Moreover, he expounded: “You have elevated the Lord this day.… And the Lord has elevated you, this day…” (Deuteronomy 26:17–18) – the Holy One blessed be He said to the Jewish people: You have rendered Me a single entity in the world, as it is written: “Hear Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4), and I will render you a single entity in the world, as it is stated: “Who is like Your people, like Israel, one nation on earth” (II Samuel 7:23). He also commenced and taught: “The words of the wise are like goads” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – why are matters of Torah likened to a goad? It is to tell you: Just as this goad directs the cow to its furrows to bring life to the world, so, matters of Torah direct the heart of those who study them from the paths of death to the paths of life. If so, just as this goad is movable, so too matters of Torah are movable? The verse states: “And like implanted nails” (Ecclesiastes 12:11). If so, just as this nail diminishes and does not expand, (When the nail is removed from the wall, it leaves a hole.) so, matters of Torah diminish and do not expand. The verse states: “Implanted [netuim]” – just as this sapling [netia] flourishes and multiplies, so too, matters of Torah flourish and multiply. “The collectors of wisdom [baalei asupot]” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – these are Torah scholars, who sit in many groups [asupot] and engage in Torah study. These rule it ritually impure and those rule it pure; these prohibit and those permit; these disqualify and those rule it valid. Lest a person say: Since these rule it ritually impure and those rule it pure; these prohibit and those permit; these disqualify and those rule it valid, how can I study Torah now? The verse states: “They were given from one shepherd” (Ecclesiastes 12:11). One God gave them; one leader said them from the mouth of the Master of all creation, blessed be He, as it is written: “God spoke all these matters” (Exodus 20:1). You, too, render your ears like a funnel and acquire for yourself a heart that hears the statements of those who rule it ritually impure and the statements of those who rule it pure; the statements of those who prohibit and the statements of those who permit; the statements of those who disqualify and the statements of those who rule it valid. He said to them in this formulation: No generation that Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya is in its midst, is orphaned. Another matter: “The words of the wise are like goads [kadarvonot]” – Rabbi Tanḥuma bar Abba said: Just as this goad directs the cow to plow its furrow, so, the words of the wise direct this person to the paths of the Holy One blessed be He. Rabbi Tanḥuma said: The Mishna called it marde’a, and the Bible called it darvan and malmad, as it is written: “A cattle goad [malmad]” (Judges 3:31), and likewise, “and to set the goad [darvan]” (I Samuel 13:21). Rabbi Natan said: Why is it called marde’a? It is because it imparts knowledge [moreh de’a] to the cow. Why is it called darvan? It is because it causes understanding to reside [dar bina] in the cow. Why is it called malmad? It is because it teaches [melamed] the cow to plow in its furrow. The same is true of the words of the wise; they cause wisdom to reside in people, impart knowledge in them, and teach them the ways of the Holy One blessed be He. “And like implanted nails” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – they are implanted in a person when he observes them. Why are they likened to a sapling [netia]? Just as the roots of a tree take root everywhere, so the words of the wise enter and take root throughout the body. “The collectors [asupot] of wisdom” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – when are they like implanted nails in a person? It is when a master of Torah enters to teach, and they gather [ne’esafim] to hear. “They were given from one shepherd” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – on the first day of the festival, Rabbi Yoḥanan would recite the blessing: Blessed are You, Lord our God, who sanctified us with His mitzvot and commanded us regarding the taking of the palm branch [lulav]. The rest of the days: Regarding the mitzva of the elders. Rabbi Yehoshua would recite the blessing: Regarding the taking of the lulav, each day. Does Rabbi Yehoshua not concede to Rabbi Yoḥanan that the first day is an obligation by Torah law, as it is stated: “You shall take for you on the first day…” (Leviticus 23:40), and the rest of the days are by rabbinic law? Rabbi Shimon bar Ḥalafta said in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: That is what Rabbi Yehoshua holds. Why, then, did he do so? It is because it is written: “The words of the wise are like goads…they were given from one shepherd” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – matters of Torah law and matters of rabbinic law were given from one shepherd. “More than that, my son, be careful: Making many books without end, and much contemplation is weariness of the flesh” (Ecclesiastes 12:12). “More than that, my son, be careful” – more than regarding matters of Torah law, be careful regarding matters of rabbinic law. Likewise it says: “As your love is better than wine” (Song of Songs 1:2) – the words of the beloved are better than the wine of Torah. Why? It is because one cannot issue halakhic rulings properly on the basis of matters of Torah, because it is vague, and it consists entirely of symbols, as it is stated: “Teach it to the children of Israel; place it [sima] in their mouths” (Deuteronomy 31:19), symbols [simanim] in their mouths. However, from statements of the Sages one can issue halakhic rulings properly, because they explain the Torah. That is why the statements of the Sages are likened to darvanot, because they cause wisdom [medayrin bina] to reside in people. Another matter: “More than that, my son, be careful” (Ecclesiastes 12:12) – Rabbi Abba of Sadronanya said: Were a person to say to you: Why were the statements of the scribes not given written, just as the matters of Torah were given; say to him: It is because it is impossible to write all their statements. That is what is written: “More than that [mehema], my son, be careful.” What is mehema? What [ma] enters you if you come to write the statements of the scribes? Why? It is because were you to write their statements, there is no limit or end to the statements that would enable producing books. That is what is written: “Making many books without end” (Ecclesiastes 12:12). What, then, shall a person do? He shall greatly exert [meyage’a] his flesh to contemplate [lahgot] the statements of the Sages. That is what is written: “And much contemplation [velahag] is weariness [yegiat] of the flesh” (Ecclesiastes 12:12). Another matter: “And much contemplation [is weariness [yegiat] of the flesh]” (Ecclesiastes 12:12) – if you exerted [yagata] yourself greatly in their statements, the Holy One blessed be He will remove the evil inclination from you. That is what is written: “Flesh,” just as it says: “[I will give you a new heart…and I will remove the stony heart from your flesh]; I will give you a heart of flesh” (Ezekiel 36:26). Another matter: “And much contemplation [velahag] is weariness [yegiat] of the flesh” (Ecclesiastes 12:12) – if you exerted [yagata] yourself greatly in contemplation of the statements of the Sages, the Holy One blessed be He will herald you good tidings [besorot]. That is, “flesh [basar].” Another matter: If you exerted yourself greatly in the statements of the Sages, you become like a ruler [basar]; that is what is written: “Flesh [basar]” (Ecclesiastes 12:12). Likewise, it says: “Through me [bi] rulers rule [sarim yasoru]” (Proverbs 8:16). Another matter: “The words of the wise are like goads [kadarvonot]” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – Rabbi Berekhya HaKohen said: A girl’s ball [kadur shel banot], like the sphere that children catch and throw from here to there. The statements of the Sages are the same; this states his reason and that one states his reason. Is it, perhaps, that because this one states one reason and that one says a second reason, perhaps their words are ephemeral? The verse states: “And like implanted nails” (Ecclesiastes 12:11). It did not say “and like fixed nails,” but rather, “implanted.” Why? It is because he made them like nails, and a nail that has a head is easier to extract. That is why it said: “Like implanted nails.” Roots of a tree that are planted are difficult to uproot. Why are their statements likened to a nail? It is because an iron nail that has a head, even though it is hard, it is easy to extract, and the roots of a tree that are planted even though they are difficult to extract, but they do not have strength like the strength of iron. That is why it is stated: “Like implanted nails”; matters of Torah were accorded the strength of iron and are like the planted roots of a tree. Rabbi Berekhya HaKohen ben Rabbi said: We read it masmerot, (With the letter samekh.) but it is written only masmerot. (With the letter sin.) Just as the priestly and Levite watches [mishmarot] are twenty-four, so the books (Of the Bible.) are twenty-four. It juxtaposed the statements of the scribes to matters of Torah, that they, like them, are true. Another matter: “And like [implanted] nails [ukhemasmerot]” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – masmerot is written; just as the priestly watches are twenty-four, so too, the nails are twenty-four. The question is asked: How many nails need there be in the sandal? (So it would be permitted to wear it on Shabbat.) Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Five, corresponding to the five books of the Torah. Rav Huna said: Seven, as it is stated: “Iron and bronze your padlocks, and all your days, shall be the flow of your oil” (Deuteronomy 33:25). (Your bronze nails in your sandals shall be like your days, seven.) Rav Aḥa expounded in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina: Nine. Rabbi would allot eleven on this side and thirteen on that side, the number of priestly watches. Another matter: “Like implanted nails” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – you affix this nail, and even though you then extract it, its place is recognizable; so, anyone against whom the Sages extend their hand, even if they subsequently accepted him, ultimately he will receive his just deserts at their hand. Another matter: “Like implanted nails” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – when matters of Torah emerge properly from the mouths of their promulgators, they are pleasing to their listeners. “Like implanted nails [kemasmerot]” – when they emerge distorted, they are bitter for their listeners; “kemasmerot” – items that dissolve and are bitter [kemas marot]. “The collectors [asupot] of wisdom” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – when are matters of Torah implanted in this person? It is when their masters are taken [ne’esafim] from them. As long as his teacher is alive, he could be distracted and say: Whenever I need, my teacher is available to me and I can ask him. When his teacher dies, he must toil day and night to sustain his studies. He knows that he has no one to ask. That is, when is it that they are implanted in this person? It is when their masters are taken [ne’esafim] from them. “They were given from one shepherd” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – even though this one states his reason and that one states his reason, the statements of this one and that one, all of them were given from Moses, what he received from the single One of the universe. Another matter: “The words of the wise are like goads” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – it is taught: From where do you say that if a person heard a matter from an insubstantial one of Israel that it should be in his eyes as though he heard from a Sage of Israel? The verse states: “It will be if you hear My commandments that I command you today” (Deuteronomy 11:13), not as one who hears from the mouth of a Sage, but rather, as one who hears from the mouths of Sages, as it is stated: “The words of the wise are like goads.” Just as this goad directs the cow to its furrows to bring life to the world, so, matters of Torah direct the knowledge of a person to know the Omnipresent. And not as one hears from the mouths of Sages, but rather as one who hears from the mouths of Sanhedrin, as it is stated: “Collectors of wisdom [asupot]” (Ecclesiastes 12:11). Asupot is nothing other than Sanhedrin, as it is stated: “Gather to Me seventy men of the elders of Israel” (Numbers 11:16). And not as one who hears from the mouths of Sanhedrin, but rather, as one who hears from the mouth of Moses, as it is stated: “Were given from one shepherd” (Ecclesiastes 12:11), as it is stated: “And His nation remembered the days of old, Moses” (Isaiah 63:11), and it says: “And Moses shepherded” (Exodus 3:1). And not as one who hears from the mouth of Moses, but rather as one who hears from the mouth of the Holy One blessed be He, as it is stated: “Were given from one shepherd.” “Shepherd of Israel, listen” (Psalms 80:2) – “one,” as it is stated: “The Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4). It says: “[Your neck is like an ivory tower;] your eyes are pools in Ḥeshbon, by the gate of Bat Rabim; your nose is like the tower of Lebanon overlooking Damascus” (Song of Songs 7:5). “Your eyes” – these are the elders, who are appointed over the congregation. Likewise it says: “For the Lord poured upon you a spirit of deep sleep, and He closed your eyes; [He covered the prophets and your leaders, the seers]” (Isaiah 29:10). (It refers to their leaders as “eyes.”) “Pools” – just as this pool, a person does not know what is in it, so, a person cannot reckon the statements of the Sages. “In Ḥeshbon” – as their conclusions are drawn through counsel and thought [maḥshava]. Where are these conclusions drawn? It is in the study halls at the gate of Bat Rabim. (Traditionally the courts, including the judges and their disciples, would assemble at the city gates.) “Your nose is like the tower of Lebanon overlooking Damascus” – if you fulfill the Torah, aspire to Elijah, to whom I said: “Return on your path to the wilderness of Damascus.” And it says: “Remember the Torah of Moses My servant.… Behold, I am sending you Elijah the prophet…” (Malachi 3:22–23). “More than that, my son, be careful” (Ecclesiastes 12:12) – the Holy One blessed be He said: I have written for you twenty-four books, be careful not to add to them. Why? “Making many books without end” (Ecclesiastes 12:12) – anyone who reads a verse that is not from the twenty-four books, it is as though he read the books of heretics. That is, “be careful making many books,” as anyone who does so has no share in the World to Come. That is what is written: “Without end,” just as it says: “But you, go to the end […at the end of the days]” (Daniel 12:13). (End here is taken to refer to the time of salvation. One who is not worthy of salvation does not merit the World to Come.) You see what is the punishment of one who adds a book. From where is it derived that one who contemplates them becomes wearied from them? “And much contemplation is weariness of the flesh” – as the flesh will not be roused from the dust, like what we learned: These have no share in the World to Come…and one who reads heretical literature. (Sanhedrin 90a.) Another matter: “The words of the wise are like goads, and like implanted nails” (Ecclesiastes 12:11) – just as this nail that is implanted in the door sustains the boards, so, when the righteous issue a decree, the Holy One blessed be He fulfills their words. Know that it is so from Jacob, as when he blessed Manasseh and Ephraim, he had the younger precede the elder, and the Holy One blessed be He fulfilled his decree. In his regard it is stated: “The words of the wise are kadarvonot” – do not read it as kadarvonot, but rather as kadrabanut, as, when Jacob decreed that the authority [rabanut] would be with Ephraim, the Holy One blessed be He fulfilled his words like an implanted nail. The Holy One blessed be He said: Since Jacob decreed regarding Ephraim that he would be first, I too will place him first regarding all matters: regarding judges, regarding banners, regarding kings, and regarding offerings. Regarding judges, (Judge in the sense of leader, as it is employed in the book of Judges.) Joshua, as he was a judge: “For the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea son of Nun” (Numbers 13:8); and thereafter, Gideon son of Yo’ash, who was from the tribe of Manasseh. Regarding the banners, “the banner of the camp of Ephraim” (Numbers 2:18), and then, “with it is the tribe of Manasseh” (Numbers 2:20). Regarding kings, Yerovam son of Nevat was from Ephraim, and then Yehu son of Nimshi, from Manasseh. The offerings of the princes, too, when they came to present their offerings: Ephraim presents his offering first, on the seventh day, and Manasseh later, on the eighth day. Accordingly it says: “On the seventh day, prince of the children of Ephraim” and then, “on the eighth day, prince of the children of Manasseh" (Numbers 7:54). In his [Jacob’s] regard, the verse states: “You will decide something, and He will fulfill it for you” (Job 22:28).

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:49). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]….” – this is the offering that he presented in the name of Jacob, who had him precede Manasseh, and in the name of Joseph, who, because of his love, Jacob blessed him all those blessings, just as it says: “He blessed Joseph and said: The God [before whom my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, walked…]” (Genesis 48:15), and it says: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh…” (Genesis 48:20). “Dish [kaarat]” – this is Jacob; do not read it as kaarat, but rather, as akeret, who uprooted [akar] the right hand from Manasseh in favor of Ephraim. “Silver” – after, “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20); what he said to Joseph: “His father refused, and said: I know, my son, I know; he too shall become a people…” (Genesis 48:19). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – corresponding to the one hundred and thirty words that there are from “he laid it on Ephraim’s head” (Genesis 48:14) until “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – this is Joseph, who was cast away [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “One” – as he was king in Egypt, just as it says: “One of the people (Avimelekh said this referring to himself.) almost lay [with your wife]” (Genesis 26:10). Likewise it says: “Joseph was the ruler over the land…” (Genesis 42:6). “Silver” – after “the tongue of the righteous is choice silver,” as due to his wisdom he was privileged to achieve kingship, just as it says: “After God has disclosed all this to you.… You will be in charge of my house…” (Genesis 41:39–40). “Seventy shekels in the sacred shekel” – as Gabriel came and added one letter from the name of the Holy One blessed be He to his name and taught him seventy languages, as it is stated: “He established it as a precept for Joseph [bihosef] (He added a heh, changing Joseph [Yosef] to Yehosef.) when he went out over Egypt; I learned a language I had not known” (Psalms 81:6), as were it not so, the Egyptians would not have accepted Joseph to rule over them. “Both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” – Jacob and Joseph were both full-fledged righteous men, and the two of them resembled one another. This accords with what Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph” (Genesis 37:2). It should have said nothing other than: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Reuben.” Why is it stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”? It is to teach you that Joseph resembled his father in every respect. Just as Jacob was born circumcised, so too, Joseph was born circumcised. Just as this one, his mother was barren, so too, that one, his mother was barren. Just as this one, his mother suffered from the pain of her pregnancy, so too that one, his mother suffered during birth. Just as this one, his mother bore two, so too that one, his mother bore two. Just as this one, his brother seeks to kill him, this one, too, his brothers seek to kill him. This one, his brother hates [soneh] him, and that one, likewise. This one is a shepherd and that one is a shepherd. This one is hated [nistam] and that one is hated. (See Genesis 27:41, 49:23.) This one was stolen from twice: “Stolen in the day and stolen at night” (Genesis 31:39); that one, there is a double expression of stealing: “For I was abducted [gunov gunavti] [from the land of the Hebrews]” (Genesis 40:15). This one was blessed with ten blessings, (See Genesis 27:28–29.) and that one was blessed with ten blessings. (See Deuteronomy 33:13–17.) This one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel, and that one departed and went outside of the Land of Israel. This one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel, and that one took a wife outside of the Land of Israel. This one begot children outside of the Land of Israel, and that one begot children outside of the Land of Israel. This one, angels accompanied him, and that one, angels accompanied him. (A midrash says that when Joseph went to his brothers at the behest of his father, three angels accompanied him.) This one ascended to greatness by means of a dream (See Genesis 28:10–16.) and that one ascended to greatness by means of a dream. This one, his father-in-law’s household was blessed on his account, and that one, his father-in-law’s (According to Bereshit Rabba 86:3, Joseph’s father-in-law Potifera was Potifar.) household was blessed on his account. This one descended to Egypt, and that one descended to Egypt. This one ended the famine and that one ended the famine. (See Bereshit Rabba 89:9.) This one administered an oath to his son, and that one administered an oath to his brothers. This one died in Egypt, and that one died in Egypt. This one was embalmed, and that one was embalmed. This one, his bones ascended, and that one, his bones ascended. Because Joseph resembled his father, that is why it is stated: “These are the chronicles of Jacob, Joseph”; and that is why it is stated: “Both of them full…” – regarding Jacob and Joseph. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:50). “One…ladle [kaf]” – it corresponds to the palm of his right hand, which he placed on Ephraim’s head. Why does it call it “one”? It is because it is more significant than the left. “Gold…ten shekels” – it corresponds to the ten words that there are from: “Israel extended his right hand” (Genesis 48:14) until “and he was the younger” (Genesis 48:14). “Filled with incense” – Jacob saw this matter through the divine spirit, that Ephraim was worthy for him to place his right hand on his head. Likewise it says: “Guiding [sikel] his hands, as Manasseh was the first born” (Genesis 48:14). His hands were guided [hiskilu] by the divine spirit, just as it says: “Maskil of Eitan the Ezraḥite” (Psalms 89:1). (This is a psalm stated by Eitan the Ezraḥite with divine guidance.) “One young bull, one ram, one sheep in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:51). “One young [ben bakar] bull” – corresponding to Abraham, as it is stated: “Abraham ran to the cattle [habakar]” (Genesis 18:7). “One ram” – corresponding to Isaac, in whose regard it is written: “[Abraham…] took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son” (Genesis 22:13). “One sheep” – corresponding to Jacob, in whose regard it is written: “Jacob separated the sheep” (Genesis 30:40). Why did he sacrifice these three kinds of burnt offerings? It corresponds to the three patriarchs, corresponding to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “Let my name and the name of my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, be called upon them” (Genesis 48:16). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:52). “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Elishama son of Amihud” (Numbers 7:53). “One goat as a sin offering” – corresponding to Joseph, as it is written: “They slaughtered a goat” (Genesis 37:31). Why did he sacrifice this corresponding to Joseph? It is because when Jacob blessed them with the name of the three patriarchs, likewise, he blessed them with the name of Joseph and made them dependent upon him, as it is stated: “By you Israel shall bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the two blessings that he blessed them: the former, “[may the angel…] bless the lads” (Genesis 48:16), and the latter, “by you Israel shall bless….” “Five rams, [five goats, five lambs]” – three species, corresponding to three generations that Joseph saw for Ephraim, who were attributed to Joseph, and they were patrilineal houses, as it is stated: “Joseph saw great-grandchildren from Ephraim” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise it says: “These are the sons of Ephraim by their families: Of Shutelaḥ.… And these are the sons of Shutelaḥ: Of Eran…” (Numbers 26:35–36). Ephraim, Shutelaḥ, Eran, these are three sons from three generations. Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five words (In the Hebrew phrase.) of “he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20), as it is from there that Ephraim merited to present his offering first. “This was the offering…” – because he presented the offering in this order, the Holy One blessed be He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Elishama….”

“He shall give her the water to drink, and it will be, if she was defiled and committed trespass against her husband, the water that causes curse will enter her for bitterness, and her belly will distend, and her thigh will fall, and the woman will become a curse among her people” (Numbers 5:27). “He shall give her the water to drink…” – Rabbi Akiva would say: If the scroll was erased and she said: I will not drink, if it is due to fear, they give her to drink against her will. But if she said it due to certainty, (She admits that she was defiled.) they do not give her to drink; she has already been examined. “Will enter her” – why is it stated? Because it says: “Her belly will distend,” I have derived only her belly and her thigh; the rest of the limbs, from where is it derived? The verse states: “Will enter her.” “And [the woman] will become a curse” – they will curse invoking her: May it befall you as it befell so-and-so. Likewise it says: “You will leave your name as a curse for My chosen: May the Lord God put you to death; but His servants He will call by another name” (Isaiah 65:15). We find that the wicked are an oath for the righteous. From where is it derived that the righteous are a blessing for the wicked? It is as it is stated: “Nations will bless themselves by him” (Jeremiah 4:2), and it says: “He blessed them that day, saying: By you shall Israel bless, saying: May God place you like Ephraim and like Manasseh, and he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20).

“He blessed them that day, saying: By you shall Israel bless, saying: May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh; and he placed Ephraim before Manasseh” (Genesis 48:20). “He blessed them that day” – just as he placed him first here, (Just as Jacob mentioned Ephraim before Manasseh in this verse. ) so he placed him first everywhere. He placed him first regarding generations: These are the generations of the sons of Ephraim and then these are the generations of the sons of Manasseh. (Commentaries debate what this sentence refers to, and some suggest that it be emended or removed from the text of the midrash (see Etz Yosef; Maharzu). ) Regarding lineage: “For the children of Ephraim, their descendants, by their families” (Numbers 1:32). (Only after the tribe of Ephraim is mentioned is the tribe of Manasseh mentioned (see Numbers 1:32–35). ) He placed him first regarding inheritance: “This is the inheritance of the sons of Ephraim” (see Joshua 16:8) and then, this is the inheritance of the sons of Manasseh. (This is not a direct citation of a verse, but a reference to the discussion of the inheritance of the tribe of Manasseh, in Joshua 17:1–12. ) He placed him first in the banners: “The banner of the camp of Ephraim” (Numbers 2:18) and then, “with it is the tribe of Manasseh” (Numbers 2:20). He placed him first regarding the princes: “On the seventh day, the prince for the sons of Ephraim” (Numbers 7:48) and then, “on the eighth day, the prince for the sons of Manasseh” (Numbers 2:54). He placed him first regarding judges: Joshua from Ephraim and Gideon from Manasseh. He placed him first regarding kings: Yerovam from Ephraim and Yehu from Manasseh. He placed him first regarding blessing: “May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh.” He placed him first regarding blessing: “He placed Ephraim before Manasseh.”

"On the eighth day, the chieftain of the Children of Menashe" (Numbers 7:54). Teach us, our rabbi, what is [the status of] a light of Chanukah from the first day that has oil remain in it. Can [it] be lit on the second [day]? So did our rabbis teach: [Regarding] a light of Chanukah from the first day that has oil remain in it, one should add [at least] a tiny amount to it and light it on the second day. And if there was [oil] left over on the second day, he adds upon it on the third day and lights. And so on with all of the days. But if there was [oil] left over on the eighth day, he makes it into a bonfire by itself. Why? Since it was put aside for the commandment, it is forbidden to use it [for another purpose]. A person should not say, "I will not fulfill the commandments of the elders (rabbis), since they are not from the Torah." The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them, "My children, you are not allowed to say this. Rather, observe anything that they decree upon you, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 17:10-11), 'And you shall do according to [...] the law that they shall instruct you.'" Why? Because I also agree with their words, as it is stated (Job 22:28), "You will decree and it will be fulfilled for you." You should know, as behold what is written [about] Yaakov at the time that he blessed Menashe and Ephraim? "And he placed Ephraim before Menashe" (Genesis 48:20). He made the younger [go] before the older; and the Holy One, blessed be He, fulfilled his decree. When? During the sacrifices of the chieftains, such that the tribe of Ephraim sacrificed first, as it is stated (Numbers 7:48), "On the seventh day, the chieftain of the Children of Ephraim," and [only] afterwards [was the sacrifice of] Menashe. From where [do we know this]? From that what they read about the matter, "On the eighth day, the chieftain of the Children of Menashe" (Numbers 7:54).

... [What about all] the praise of Joseph, who exceeded in the honor of his father? And yet he did not enter into him all the time, such that were it not that they came to tell him, "Your father is sick," he would not have known! Rather this is to inform you of his righteousness. For he did not want to be alone with his father, lest he say to him, "How did your brothers act with you?" And [then] he would curse them.... Hence he did not go to his father all the time.)

And you saw all the detestable things and the disgusting things of wood and stone that they themselves think (are thought?) as disgusting things, that they make an idol of wood or stone. When it is new they serve it, and when it is blurred(?) they detest it and throw it into the disgusting thing [i.e. dungheap] and into the dirt of the streets. And when it does not do what they want, they curse it and degrade it, as it says "and when they are hungry, they shall rage and revolt against their king and their divine beings" (Yeshayahu 8:21) and when they curse others, say: O, it is like their god who is unable to help them, like "By you shall Israel give-blessings"... (Bereishit 48:20), and it does not say "they shall curse their king and their God".

לבני יוסף לאפרים, “For the children of Joseph,- for Ephrayim;” after the Torah had first enumerated all the sons of Leah it now turns to the sons of Rachel, mentioning Ephrayim ahead of Menashe the older seeing Yaakov had blessed Ephrayim first on is deathbed (compare Genesis 48,20). Afterwards the Torah mentioned the descendants of Binyamin. Although born last, the Torah honoured the memory of Rachel by mentioning him ahead of the sons of the maidservants. When listing the four sons of the maidservants, the Torah begins with Dan who was the senior of those four sons, whereas the Torah lists Asher next seeing that he was encamped next to Dan (compare 2,27). Next the Torah lists Gad who was the older of the sons of Zilpah. Next to him was Naftali.

OF THE CHILDREN OF JOSEPH, NAMELY, OF THE CHILDREN OF EPHRAIM. Scripture mentioned Ephraim before Menasheh, and stated Joseph’s relationship to him [which it does not do in the case of Menasheh], (Verse 34.) and similarly later [Scripture gave Ephraim precedence] at the [division of the tribes according to their] standards, by making him master of the standard, [whilst Menasheh is mentioned merely as one of the two tribes gathered around him], because in accordance with Jacob’s blessing (Genesis 48:20.) he was to be [given the honor accorded to] the firstborn, and his brother [Menasheh] was to be second to him. Moreover, the sons of Ephraim were more numerous than those of Menasheh (Ephraim totalled 40,500 (Verse 33), whilst Menasheh numbered 32,200 (Verse 35).) [and hence Ephraim was mentioned first]. But at the second census in the plains of Moab (Further, 26:3.) Scripture mentioned Menasheh first, because at that time his sons were more numerous [than those of Ephraim], (The children of Menasheh were then 52,700 (ibid., Verse 34), whilst Ephraim had only 32,500 (ibid., Verse 37).) and [also because] they took their inheritance first. (Half of the tribe of Menasheh joined the tribes of Gad and Reuben in settling during the lifetime of Moses on the east side of the Jordan (ibid., 32:33).) Similarly when mentioning the princes of the Land [who were to take possession of the Land for their respective tribes] Scripture mentioned Menasheh first, and also Joseph’s relationship to him. (Ibid., 34:23: Of the children of Joseph; of the tribe of the children of Menasheh. In the following verse Scripture mentions the prince of the children of Ephraim.) In [the story of] the spies, however, Scripture mentioned Ephraim first, and Joseph’s relationship it stated only in referring to the tribe of Menasheh. (Ibid., 13:8, 11.) It appears to me by way of homiletic exposition that it is on account of the evil report that Joseph brought [to his father] concerning his brothers (Genesis 37: 2.) that Scripture, [in the story of the spies], associates with him the spy who [was among those who] spread the evil report [about the Land, namely the spy from the tribe of Menasheh, whereas the spy from the tribe of Ephraim was Joshua the son of Nun, who was not among those who spread the evil report]. Or it may be that Scripture [in relating the story of the spies] gave honor to both [tribes who were descended from Joseph], and Ephraim had sufficient honor in its prince [Joshua the son of Nun who ministered to Moses, therefore Scripture mentioned the honor of descent from Joseph only in the case of Menasheh].

עין יעקב — The word עין has the same meaning here as in (Numbers 11:7) “And its appearance (עינו) was as the appearance (עין) of crystal” (i.e., the word עין is used as a term of comparison, “as”, ”like”). The meaning is: And Israel dwelt alone like the blessing with which Jacob blessed them (cf. Targum); not like the בדד which Jeremiah used, (Jeremiah 15:17), viz., “I sat alone (בדד) [because of thy hand, for thou hast filled me with Thy indignation]”, but like the assurance which Jacob gave them, (Genesis 48:20) “And God shall be with you, and bring you back to the land of your fathers” (cf. Sifrei Devarim 356:6).

ונברכו בך AND IN THEE SHALL BE BLESSED — There are many Agadoth concerning this but the plain sense of the text is as follows: A man says to his son, “Mayest thou become as Abraham”. This, too, is the meaning wherever the phrase ונברכו בך “And in thee shall be blessed” occurs in Scripture, and the following example proves this: (Genesis 48:20) בך יברך “By thee shall Israel bless their children saying, “May God make thee as Ephraim and Manasseh”.

והתברכו בזרעך AND IN THY SEED SHALL BLESS THEMSELVES — A man will say to his son, “May your seed be as the seed of Isaac”. Such is the meaning of this phrase wherever it occurs in the entire Scriptures. The following passage is that from which this meaning may be derived for all such passages: (48:20) “By thee shall all Israel bless their children saying, “May God make thee [as Ephraim and Manasseh]”. So, too, in the case of a curse do we find a similar idea: (Numbers 5:27) “And the woman shall become a curse”, meaning that one who curses his enemy will say “May you be like such and such a woman”. Similar, also, is (Isaiah 65:15) “And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto mine elect”, meaning that one who takes an oath will say “May I be like such-and-such a person if I have really done so-and-so”.

ולשבעה [THE LORD MAKE THEE AN EXECRATION] AND AN OATH — This means, that everybody will swear through thee (i.e., by mention of thy name) — “If not (i.e., if I am not speaking the truth) may misfortune happen to me just as it happened to Mrs. So-and-so!” In a similar sense it states, (Isaiah 65:15) “and ye shall leave your name as an oath unto my chosen” which means that the righteous take an oath by mention of the punishment that came upon evil-doers. So, too, in reference to the blessing, does it state, (Genesis 12:3) “and through thee (i.e., by mention of thy name) shall bless themselves [all the families of the earth]”; (Genesis 48:20) “By thee shall Israel bless, saying, [God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh]” (Sifrei Bamidbar 14).

Joseph took the two of them, Ephraim with his right hand, to Israel’s left, and Manasseh with his left hand, to Israel’s right, and brought them close to him. But Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on Ephraim’s head, though he was the younger, and his left hand on Manasseh’s head – thus crossing his hands – although Manasseh was the firstborn.…Thus he put Ephraim before Manasseh. Genesis 48:13–20

As Joseph entered with his two sons, Jacob declared that the future of the nation of Israel would feel the impact of these two grandsons as much as they would feel that of the personalities of the other tribes: “Manasseh and Ephraim will be as Reuben and Simeon to me” (Genesis 48:5). Jacob understood that Ephraim was destined for a measure of greatness beyond that of his older brother. No matter Joseph’s preference, Jacob envisioned Ephraim dominating Manasseh, both then and in the future: “Yesimkha Elokim ke-Ephraim ve-khe-Menasheh” (May God make you like Ephraim [first, and then] like Manasseh). (“I know Gideon will be of Manasseh; but Joshua will come from Ephraim!” BR 97:4–5; MHG I, 717 and 722–723; Tan. VeYeĥi 6; PRE 12b; Targum Yerushalmi, Genesis 48:20.)

Jewish tradition is to bless our children that God make them as Ephraim and Manasseh, (Genesis 48:20.) people whose very names reflected aspirations for success within the broader world. More profoundly, and painfully: Manasseh and Ephraim represented the very forgetting of our roots in Eretz Yisrael, a necessary stage in our national development. Joseph understood, as we must, the necessity of letting go for a time, of planting ourselves firmly in galut (exile), though it may be a “land of affliction.”

Did Rabbi Emden have the practice of only blessing the sons and not the daughters? That is unlikely. From that which he wrote, "to bless the children," and not, "the sons," it appears that they would bless the sons and daughters alike with the same blessing of Jacob, "May God make you like Ephraim and like Manasseh." And that is what is implied in Scripture: By you shall Israel invoke blessings (Genesis 48:20) — that the blessing is for all of Israel.

On the west: the standard of the division of Ephraim, troop by troop. Chieftain of the Ephraimites: Elishama son of Ammihud.

He blessed them on that day saying: Through you shall [the People of] Israel bless saying; May Elohim make you as Ephraim and Menasheh. He placed Ephraim ahead of Menasheh.

And he blessed them in that day, saying, In thee, Joseph my son, shall the house of Israel bless their infants in the day of their circumcision, saying, The Lord set thee as Ephraim and as Menasheh. And in the numbering of the tribes the prince of Ephraim shall be numbered before the prince of Menasheh. And he appointed that Ephraim should be before Menasheh.

ויאמר ישראל אל יוסף הנה אנכי מת, Israel said to Joseph: "I am about to die, etc." When Israel said: "I am about to die," he meant that only he was going to depart, the שכינה was not going to depart from them. Jacob added that G'd would lead the Jewish people back to the land of their ancestors. Jacob underlined that the land had been given by G'd to the patriarchs and not to the generation who would leave Egypt at the time of the Exodus. This being so, he was within his rights when he assigned Shechem to Joseph's descendants since he was the owner. When Jacob said: "and I have given to you one (extra) share, etc.," this is a valid explanation. Even according to the view of Rabbi Nechemyah in Bereshit Rabbah 97,6 that Jacob referred to the city of Shechem conquered by Shimon and Levi, Jacob implied that had it not been for the fact that G'd had given the land to the patriarchs they would not have succeeded.

ויאמר ישראל אל יוסף, “Yisrael said to Joseph, etc.” After Yisrael had blessed the lads and appointed each one of them to become a founding father of one of the tribes, he turned his attention back to Joseph and promised him both matters pertaining to the exile as well as matters pertaining to the eventual redemption when G’d would bring the nation back to the land of Canaan.

אנכי מת, I am close to dying, therefore I command you that when the time comes and the Lord will bring you back, the word אתכם referring not to “you,” but to “your descendants,” אל ארץ אבותיכם, that you will have an extra share over and above that allocated to your brothers, i.e. the extra share befitting the firstborn. This was the practical meaning of Yaakov having said that Joseph’s sons would be to him as Reuven and Shimon. They would inherit as if they had been biological sons of their grandfather (not merely grandsons) when it came to the division of that land among the tribes.

הנה אנכי מת, although I am about to die, I am aware that after my death. והיה אלוקים עמכם והשיב אתכם אל ארץ אבותיכם, G’d will be with you and at the completion of 400 years predicted to Avraham will bring you back to the land of your fathers.

הנה אנכי מת, seeing that I make this my last will and testament when I am close to death, this gift is irrevocable.

והשיב אתכם אל ארץ אבותיכם, where my gifts will materialise.

Israel said to Joseph: Behold, I am dying and will not return to the land of Canaan while I am alive. Although nothing was preventing his children from returning there at that time, Jacob knew prophetically that they would not return there in the near future. Nevertheless, he declared to his son: God will be with you, and He will eventually restore you to the land of your fathers.

Hear me, my brothers, and give ear to me, my people (I Chron. 28:2). Understand, you fools (Prov. 8:5); listen, you rulers. Be careful what you say, and may God be with you (Gen. 48:21). If [you see] scholars in a vision like rams butting and vanquishing each other, (Cf. Dan. 8.) it is not for you or us to say, “Remember and observe. (Cf. Rashi on Exod. 20:8, regarding the difference in the text of the Ten Commandments in Exodus and Deuteronomy.) this tradition is proper, and that tradition is improper.” Solutions are for God (Gen. 40:8). Those who are basing [their belief] upon the explanation of a thing (Eccles. 8:1), not to fan and not to cleanse (Jer. 4:11). Is there not a time of service for man upon the earth? (Job 7:1), while the testimony of God is faithful (Ps. 19:8), as is known to an ear which hears. You who dwell in the gardens, friends listen (Song 8:13), you will lie down in the midst of the wise (Prov. 15:31).

“Israel said to Joseph: Behold, I am dying, and God will be with you, and He will restore you to the land of your fathers” (Genesis 48:21). “Israel said to Joseph: Behold, I [anokhi] am dying, and God will be with you, and He will restore…” – the son of Rabbi Yosei’s brother [said]: The elder gave them three signs: One who comes [to redeem] with the term anokhi, who will appoint elders from among you, and will say to you pakod, he is the redeemer. (These were Jacob’s signs as to the identity of the future redeemer of the Israelites. Moses fulfilled all three signs; see, e.g., Exodus 3:11, 3:16, 4:29. ) Rabbi Ḥunya removes anokhi, and inserts the ineffable Name in its place. (See Exodus 3:13–14. ) “And I have given to you one portion [shekhem] beyond your brothers, which I took from the hand of the Emorite with my sword and with my bow” (Genesis 48:22). “And I have given to you” a son who was vigilant [shehishkim], and you did not act in accordance with their actions; therefore, the portion will be in your territory. (The midrash interprets the additional portion promised here to Joseph to be the city of Shekhem. This was granted to Joseph, because he did not act as his brothers did in Shekhem, where they sold Joseph into slavery (see Genesis 37:14; Sanhedrin 102a). Alternatively, he did not act as did Shekhem, who raped Dina (Genesis 34:2). Joseph refrained from acting on his desires even when approached by the wife of Potifar (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Pinḥas said: In Shekhem there was breach in the area of licentiousness, and you repaired it; therefore, it will be in your portion. Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya: Rabbi Yehuda said: “I have given to you [one] shekhem” – this is the birthright and the garment of Adam the first man. “Which I took from the hand of the Emorite” – this is Esau. Was Esau, in fact, an Emorite? It is, rather, that he performed the actions of the Emorite. “With my sword and with my bow” – with mitzvot and good deeds. Rabbi Neḥemya said: “I have given to you one shekhem” – this is literally [the city of] Shekhem. “Which I took from the hand of the Emorite” – this is Ḥamor father of Shekhem. Was he, in fact, an Emorite? It is that the Hivite are included in the Emorite. (The Emorites were a larger group surrounding the Hivites, and therefore the Hivites were sometimes called Emorites (see Etz Yosef). ) “With my sword and with my bow” – Jacob did not want his sons to perform that act. (But when his sons performed that act, he said: What, will I allow my sons to fall at the hand of the nations of the world? What did he do? He took his sword and his bow, stood at the entrance of Shekhem, and said: If the nations of the world come to confront my sons, I will battle against them. See Bereshit Rabba 80:10.) But when…

R. Yishmael says: In the merit of Jerusalem I will split the sea for them, as it is written (Isaiah 52:1) "Awake, awake, clothe yourself in splendor, O Zion. Don your robes of glory, O Jerusalem, holy city. For there will not again enter you the uncircumcised and the unclean", and (Ibid. 51:9-10) "Awake, awake, clothe yourself in splendor, O arm of the L–rd. Awake as in days of old, as in generations of yore … Is it not You that dried up the sea, the waters of the great deep, a road for the redeemed to cross?"

Another matter: “They shall take Me a gift” – when the Holy One blessed be He told Moses about the matters pertaining to the Tabernacle, he said before Him: ‘Master of the universe, is Israel capable of crafting it?’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘Even one member of Israel is capable of crafting it,’ as it is stated: “From each man whose heart moves him” (Exodus 25:2). The Rabbis said: Jewels and pearls would fall amidst the manna that was falling for Israel, and the prominent among them would come, gather them, and store them. Know that it is so, as it is stated: “They brought him more gifts morning after morning” (Exodus 36:3). Did they bring in the morning, but in the afternoon they did not bring? It is rather that they brought from what the manna would bring down for them. Likewise, it says: “The princes [nesiim] (Another meaning of the word nesiim is clouds (see Yoma 75b). Thus, the implication is that these stones fell from the clouds along with the manna.) brought [the onyx stones and the stones for setting]” (Exodus 35:27). “This is the gift that you shall collect from them: gold, silver, and bronze” (Exodus 25:3) “This is the gift” (Exodus 25:3) – Rabbi Tavyomei said: When the time arrived for Jacob our patriarch to depart from the world, he called his sons and said to them: ‘Know that the Holy One blessed be He is destined to say to your descendants to craft a Tabernacle; however, all its needs must be ready in their possession,’ as it is stated: “And God will be with you” (Genesis 48:21). Does it enter your mind that when Jacob our patriarch was alive the Holy One blessed be He was not with his sons? Rather, so he said to them: ‘He is destined to say to you: “They shall craft a Sanctuary for Me” (Exodus 25:8), and He will descend and rest His presence in your midst, as it is stated: “They shall craft a Sanctuary for Me, and I will dwell among them” (Exodus 25:8).’ Some prepared items for themselves and some forgot. When Moses came and they crafted the Tabernacle, some brought from their own, and some brought only from what was already in their possession, as it says: “And every man with whom was found sky-blue, purple, [and scarlet wool” (Exodus 35:23), and it says: “And every man with whom acacia wood was found” (Exodus 35:24). (The verses stress regarding these items that the individuals with whom they were found brought them, in order to indicate that they had stored these items in advance in preparation for the building of the Tabernacle. )

“Go and gather the elders of Israel, and say to them: The Lord, the God of your fathers, God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, has appeared to me, saying: I have remembered you, and what is being done to you in Egypt” (Exodus 3:16). “Go and gather the elders of Israel.” The elders always uphold Israel, and thus it says: “And all Israel, and its elders, and its officers, and its judges, stood on this side and on that side of the ark” (Joshua 8:33). When is Israel capable of standing? It is when they have elders. Why, when the Temple was standing, did they consult with the elders, as it is stated: “Ask your father and he will tell you; your elders and they will say to you” (Deuteronomy 32:7)? It is because anyone who takes counsel from elders does not fail. Know that when ben-Hadad sent to the king of Israel, as it is stated: “So said ben-Hadad: Your silver and your gold are mine” (I Kings 20:3), the king of Israel sent to him: “As you said, my lord king: I, and everything that I have are yours” (Ibid. 20:4). He sent to him a second time: “But tomorrow at this time, I will send my servants to you and they will search your house, and the houses of your servants; and it will be, that everything precious [maḥmad] to you, they will seize, and take it” (I Kings 20:6). Was everything that he demanded initially not precious? He demanded silver and gold and they are precious, as it is stated: “And the precious items [ḥemdat] of all the peoples will come” (Haggai 2:7). (The following verse in Haggai states: “Mine is the silver, and Mine the gold, the utterance of the Lord of hosts.”) He demanded women and they are precious, as it is stated: “Son of man, behold, I am taking away from you the desire [maḥmad] of your eyes…” (Ezekiel 24:16). He demanded children, and they are precious, as it is stated: “And I will slay the beloved fruit [maḥmad] of their womb” (Hosea 9:16). You must say: Everything he demanded initially was precious, and “everything precious to you” is an item that is ultimately precious, that is the Torah, as it is stated: “More precious than gold and more than much fine gold” (Psalms 19:11). When the king of Israel heard this, he said: ‘This is not mine, but rather it belongs to the elders.’ Immediately, “The king of Israel called all the elders of the land…and all the elders and all the people said to him: Neither heed nor consent” (I Kings 20:7–8). Once he heeded the counsel of the elders, immediately: “The king of Israel went out, and smote the horses and the chariots” (I Kings 20:21). That is Israel consulting the elders. Therefore, the Holy One blessed be He said to Moses: “Go and gather the elders of Israel.” “Say to them…I have remembered [pakod pakadeti].” He said to him: ‘They have a tradition from Joseph that I will deliver them with this expression. (“God will remember [pakod yifkod] you” (Genesis 50:24).) Go and say to them: This is the sign.’ What is pakod pakadeti? Pakod in Egypt, pakadeti at the sea; pakod in the future, pakadeti in the past. “And what is being done to you in Egypt” – in other words, I will remember for the Egyptians what they are doing to you, as it is stated: “I remember what Amalek did to you” (I Samuel 15:2). (The verse actually states: “I remember what Amalek did to Israel.” This statement precedes God’s command to King Saul to annihilate Amalek.) “And I said: I will take you up out of the affliction of Egypt, to the land of the Canaanites and the Hitites and the Emorites and the Perizites and the Hivites and the Yevusites, to a land flowing with milk and honey. They will listen to your voice and you shall go, you and the elders of Israel, to the king of Egypt and you shall say to him: The Lord, God of the Hebrews, happened upon us. And now, please, let us go a journey of three days in the wilderness, and we will sacrifice to the Lord our God.” (Exodus 3:17-18). “And I said: I will take you up” – Say to them that, as I said to Jacob their ancestor, so I will do. What did He say to him [Jacob]? “I will also take you up” (Genesis 46:4). (God promised Jacob when he went to Egypt that he would take his descendants out of Egypt.) Likewise, Jacob said to his sons: “God will be with you and He will return you…” (Genesis 48:21). Immediately, “they will heed your voice.” Why? It is because they have a tradition of deliverance, that any deliverer who comes and says to them a double expression of remembrance [pakod pakadeti] is a genuine deliverer. Then “you shall go, you and the elders of Israel…” – He showed respect for the elders. “You shall say to him: The Lord, God of the Hebrews, happened upon us.” Why does it call them Hebrews [ivrim]? It is because they crossed [avru] the sea. “And now, please, let us go a journey of three days...” Why did they say three days and did not say, please let us go forever? Why did they say this? It was so the Egyptians would be misled and pursue them when they left, and would say: ‘He delivered them only so they would go three days and sacrifice to Him, and it is they who have delayed for so long.’ And they will pursue them after three days and He will drown them in the sea to punish them with a punishment to fit their crime, as they said: “Every boy that is born you shall cast into the Nile…” (Exodus 1:22).

“While the king was at his feast, my nard released its fragrance” (Song of Songs 1:12). “While the king was at his feast,” Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Meir says: While the King of kings was at His feast, in the firmament, Israel released a foul odor and said to the calf: “This is your god, Israel” (Exodus 32:4). Rabbi Yehuda said to him: ‘Enough, Meir, one does not expound Song of Songs disparagingly, but rather, favorably, as Song of Songs was given only in praise of Israel. What is: “While the king was at his feast”? While the King of kings was at His feast, in the firmament, Israel released a fine fragrance before Mount Sinai, and said: “Everything that the Lord has spoken we will perform and we will obey” (Exodus 24:7). According to the opinion of Rabbi Meir, it should have said: My stench released its odor. (Since the verse was referring to the Golden Calf, it should have referred to stench rather than the fragrance of the sweet-smelling nard.) Rather, a treatise ascended in their hand from the Diaspora, (The midrash is citing an ancient tradition recorded in a treatise that was transported from Babylon during the Return to Zion to build the second Temple.) and they taught in its regard that He skipped the incident of the calf for them and the act of the Tabernacle preceded it. (The sin of the Golden Calf (Exodus chap. 32) should have been recorded in the Torah immediately following the events of the revelation at Sinai. Instead, it is preceded by the commandments concerning the building of the Tabernacle (Exodus chapters 25–31), to indicate that even when Israel sinned, they were still beloved in the eyes of the God. Therefore, the verse characterizes their odor as nard.) Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Akiva, and Rabbi Berekhya, Rabbi Eliezer says: “While the king was at his feast,” while the King of kings was at His feast, in the firmament, Mount Sinai was already enveloped in flames, as it is stated: “The mountain was burning with fire” (Deuteronomy 4:11). Rabbi Akiva says: While the King of kings was at His feast, in the firmament, already, “the glory of the Lord rested on Mount Sinai” (Exodus 24:16). Rabbi Berekhya says: While Moses was at his feast in the firmament, (While he was still on Mount Sinai.) as he is called king, as it is stated: “He became king in Yeshurun, when the heads of the people were assembled” (Deuteronomy 33:5), already, “God spoke all these matters saying” (Exodus 20:1). Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov and the Rabbis, Rabbi Eliezer says: While the King of kings was at His feast, in the firmament, Mikhael, the great prince, had already descended from the heavens and rescued Abraham our patriarch from the fiery furnace. The Rabbis say: The Holy One blessed be He descended and rescued him, as it is stated: “I am the Lord who took you out of Ur of the Chaldeans” (Genesis 15:7). When did Mikhael descend? It was in the days of Ḥanaya, Mishael, and Azarya. (Mikhael is identified as the angel who descended to rescue Ḥananya, Mishael, and Azarya from the fiery furnace (see Daniel 3:25).) Rabbi Tavyomei said: While Jacob our patriarch was lying [mesev] in his bed, (The expression “at his feast [bimsibo]” in the verse is interpreted as a reference to Jacob lying on his deathbed.) the Divine Spirit gleamed in him, and he said to his sons: “God will be with you” (Genesis 48:21). He said to them: ‘He is destined to rest His Divine Presence in your midst.’ Rav Naḥman said: It is written: “Israel and everything that he had traveled and came to Beersheba” (Genesis 46:1). Where did he go? He went to chop down the cedars that Abraham our patriarch had planted in Beersheba, as it is stated: “He planted a tamarisk in Beersheba” (Genesis 21:33). (Jacob chopped them down in order to take them to Egypt.) Rabbi Levi said: It is written: “The central bar inside the planks extending from end to end” (Exodus 26:28). The bar was thirty-two cubits long. From where did they have it in their possession at that moment? (Where did they get such a long piece of wood in the wilderness, just when they needed it to build this part of the Tabernacle?) It teaches that they were hidden with them from the days of Jacob our patriarch. That is what is written: “And everyone with whom acacia wood was found” (Exodus 35:24); “acacia wood was found,” is not written here, but rather, “with whom…it was found”—from the outset. Rabbi Levi bar Ḥiyya said: They chopped them down in Magdala of the dyers (This was the name of a place in the Land of Israel.) and took them with them down to Egypt. They had no knots and no cracks. There were acacia trees in Magdala and the custom was to prohibit [using] them due to the sanctity of the Ark. (Even in the times of the Sages of the midrash, acacia trees grew in Magdala, but due to the tradition that the wood eventually used for the Ark and the rest of the Tabernacle had been cut from there, the people of Magdala would not make use of the acacia trees.) They came and asked Rav Ḥananya, colleague of the Rabbis, and he said to them: Do not deviate from the custom of your ancestors.

"as Jacob": as Jacob their father blessed them, viz. (Bereshith 48:21) "And G-d will be with you and He will return you to the land of your fathers."

יומת המת, “he that has to die shall be executed;” we find similar constructions in Genesis 48,21, concerning Yaakov and Joseph, הנה אנכי מת, “here I am dead;” and in Deuteronomy 31,27, where Moses describes a situation after his death,ואף גם אחרי מותי, “and also after my death.”

אהיה אשר אהיה, the first word אהיה is the name of G-d; the second is an explanation of why G-d is called אהיה. In other words: the reason why My name is אהיה is because I am eternal, immutable. I am therefore a most reliable G-d, in the sense of dependable helper and saviour, as I will always be around. My “lifespan” is not as that word suggests a limited period, but I am not subject to any limitations. I will still be on the side of the Jewish people at the time when I redeem them from the sufferings in Egypt, as already promised by Yaakov to Joseph in Genesis 48,21. In other words, the name revealed to Moses here by G-d was not a new name. Yaakov had already been familiar with it. It is one of the attributes of G-d, Who has many attributes. G-d tells Moses that anyone who legitimizes himself as speaking of the G-d called אהיה, will be believed. The fact is that the Israelites did believe Moses when he identified himself as speaking in the name of this G-d, as we read in Exodus 4,31.

What then has happened to the promise of the land? As if to reassure us, Genesis draws to a close with two confident predictions. Jacob, about to die, tells Joseph, “God shall be with you and bring you back to the land of your fathers” (Gen. 48:21). Joseph, before he dies, tells his brothers, “God will surely come to your aid and bring you up out of this land to the land He promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” (Gen. 50:24).

OF THE CHILDREN OF JOSEPH. The children of Joseph are mentioned after the children of Leah because Rachel’s status was greater than that of the handmaids. (Hence Rachel’s descendants are mentioned before those of the handmaids even though the children of the handmaids precede them in birth.) Scripture begins with Ephraim, in keeping with the actions of our father Jacob. (Manassah was older than Ephraim. However, Jacob placed Ephraim before Manasseh. See Gen. 48:21.) Scripture places Ephraim and Manasseh (Joseph’s sons.) before Benjamin because they are in place of Joseph. (Joseph was born before Benjamin.) Scripture then begins with Dan, (The son of Bilhah, Rachel’s handmaid.) who was the first-born of the handmaids. (Of the children born to the handmaids’. See Gen. 30:6.) Asher follows Dan (Gad and Asher were the sons of Zilpah, Leah’s handmaid. According to Gen. 30:10-13, Gad was Zilpah’s first-born. Thus Scripture should have mentioned Gad before Asher. Hence I.E.’s comment.) because God knew that Asher would be the head of those who camp under the standard of Dan. (Asher pitched next to Dan and was therefore next in importance under that standard. Gad was third under the standard of Reuben. See Num. 2:14,27.) Scripture then mentions Gad because he was the first-born of Leah’s handmaid. (See Gen. 30:10,11.)

A Midrashic approach based on Sifri Vezot Haberachah 356: the words עין יעקב mean: “a similar type of blessing to that bestowed by Yaakov.” The essence of Yaakov’s blessing had been that G’d would bring his family back to the land of Israel. (Genesis 48,21).

AND THEY SHALL SAY UNTO ME: WHAT IS HIS NAME? WHAT SHALL I SAY UNTO THEM? This verse calls aloud for an explanation. It is incomprehensible that Moses should say, And they shall say unto me: What is His name? meaning that this will be a sign to them to believe in him. The asking for His Name and Moses’ telling it to them are no sign to anyone who did not believe in Moses to begin with. If Israel knew that Name, Moses likewise knew it, and thus his knowledge thereof was equivalent to theirs and it would be no sign or wonder at all. If they had not heard of it previously, what proof would that be that they should believe in his words altogether? And now even after He informed him of the Great Name, Moses still said, But, behold, they will not believe me, (Ibid., 4:1.) and then He gave him the various signs! (Ibid., Verses 2-9.) Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that Moses asked which of G-d’s Names he should mention to Israel, for the Name of E-il Sha-dai (G-d Almighty) does not signify the performance of miraculous signs; only the Great Name, [i.e., the Tetragrammaton], indicates that. But this interpretation does not appear correct to me. Moses had not yet been told that He would make great and wondrous signs and portents at the going forth from Egypt. Rather, he was told that He would save them from the hand of the Egyptians and bring them up to the land of Canaan, and for that — to strike at the heart of Pharaoh, as well as to be victorious over the seven nations — the name E-il Sha-dai suffices. Sarah was taken out from Pharaoh’s house with great plagues, (Genesis 12:17.) and Abraham alone subdued the great kings (Ibid., 14:14-15.) — all with the help of E-il Sha-dai, the Divine Name known to the patriarchs, (Further, 6:3.) and so likewise He would do to their descendants. Moreover, Jacob had said, And ‘Elokim’ (G-d) will be with you, and bring you back unto the land of your fathers (Genesis 48:21.) , and Joseph also said, ‘Elokim’ (G-d) will surely remember you. (Ibid., 50:25.) Thus the remembrance is by Elokim! In my opinion, Moses even at that time was already the father of wisdom, great in achievement of the heights of prophecy, and inherent in his question was the request that He inform him Who is sending him, that is to say, by what Divine attribute is he sent to the Israelites, just as Isaiah said, And now the Eternal G-d hath sent me, and His spirit. (Isaiah 48:16.) Thus Moses said: “They will ask me concerning my mission whether it is with the attribute of E-il Sha-dai which stood by the patriarchs, or with the high attribute of mercy with which You will do signs and wonders which will be new phenomena in creation.” [Moses was obliged to ask] this question because He had said to him, I am the G-d of thy father, the G-d of Abraham, (Verse 6.) and He did not elucidate to him at all any of His sacred Names. Moses then heard that He assured him of the Revelation on Mount Sinai and the Giving of the Torah, and he knew that the Torah would not be given with the Name of E-il Sha-dai mentioned in connection with the patriarchs, but would be given with the Great Name with which the world came into existence. Therefore he asked, What shall I say unto them? Our Rabbis have alluded to this interpretation. Thus they said: (Shemoth Rabbah 3:6.) “And Moses said unto G-d, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel.” Rabbi Shimon related in the name of Rabbi Simon that Moses said: ‘I am destined to become the agent between Thee and them when Thou wilt give them the Torah and say unto them, I am the Eternal thy G-d.’ (Further, 20:2. “And if I am worthy to become Thy agent at the Giving of the Torah, I request to be informed now of Thy Great Name” (Eitz Yoseph to Shemoth Rabbah). This conclusion is here implied and is so clearly stated at the end of the Midrash here quoted.) “And I shall say unto them: The G-d of your fathers hath sent me unto you. At that moment, Moses desired to be elucidated concerning his activities, for he feared lest the children of Israel ask him, What is His name? What shall I say unto them? At that moment Moses desired that the Holy One, blessed be He, inform him of the Great Name, [i.e., the Tetragrammaton].” This was the purport of Moses’ question.

And G-d answered him, “‘I WILL BE THAT WHICH I WILL BE. (Verse 14.) I will be with you (“You.” In our version of Rashi: “them.”) in this sorrow, and I will be with you (“You.” In our version of Rashi: “them.”) in other sorrows.’ (“In other sorrows.” In our version of Rashi: “In the subjection [they will suffer at the hands] of the other kingdoms.”) Thereupon Moses said to Him, ‘Master of the universe! Sufficient is the evil in its time, [and why should I mention to them other sorrows in store for them in the future].’ G-d replied to him: ‘You have spoken correctly. Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: I WILL BE hath sent me unto you.’” Thus the language of Rashi quoting the words of our Rabbis. (Berachoth 9b.) Their intent in this Agadah is as follows: Moses had said before Him, blessed be He. And they shall say unto me: What is His name?, meaning that G-d should tell him the Name which wholly teaches His existence and His providence. The Holy One, blessed be He, answered him: “Why should they ask for My Name? They need no other proof, for I will be with them in all their affliction. (Isaiah 63:9.) They shall call, and I will answer them.” (See Psalms 91:14.) This is the great proof that there is a G-d in Israel near to us whenever we call upon Him, (Deuteronomy 4:7.) and verily there is a G-d that judgeth in the earth. (Psalms 58:12.) This is a correct interpretation of this Agadah (homily). In a similar way it is said in a Midrash Agadah: (Sefer V’hizhir. See Torah Shleimah by Rabbi M. Kasher, paragraph 188.) “And what is the meaning of I WILL BE THAT WHICH I WILL BE? ‘As you are with Me, so I am with you. If they open their hands and give charity, I also will open My hand, as it is said, The Eternal will open unto thee His good treasure the heaven to give the rain of thy land in its season. (Deuteronomy 28:12.) And if they do not open their hands, what is written there? Behold, He withholdeth the waters, and they dry up.’” (Job 12:15.) In a similar vein the Rabbis expounded: (Shemoth Rabbah 3:6.) “Rabbi Yitzchak said that the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: ‘I am He Who has been, Who is now, and Who will be in the future.’ This is why Eh’yeh is written here three times.” The explanation of Rabbi Yitzchak’s opinion is that since with respect to the Creator, past and future times are conceived completely in terms of the present — for there is no host succeeding host with regards to Him, and nothing of His time has passed — hence all times with reference to Him are called by one name, signifying a Being Whose existence is absolute. (Or “a Being Who is necessarily existent.” “G-d alone is that Being, for His existence is absolute — existence and essence are perfectly identical. He is not a substance to which existence is joined as an accident, as an additional element. His existence is always absolute, and has never been a new element or an accident in Him” (Moreh Nebuchim, I, 57, Friedlander’s translation).) Now Onkelos translated the first two names, [i.e. ‘Eh’yeh Asher Eh’yeh’], as “I will be with him that I will be,” (The meaning thereof is further elucidated by Ramban. In our version of Onkelos, these two Divine Names are also not translated and instead are retained in their original Hebrew form.) but he did not translate the third name Eh’yeh expressed in the verse, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: ‘Eh’yeh’ hath sent me unto you. It appears that Onkelos’ opinion is that the glorious Name (Deuteronomy 28:58.) of which He informed Moses was this four-letter Name of which He commanded him, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: ‘Eh’yeh’ hath sent me unto you. But He first informed him of the purport thereof, for Moses’ request had been to know the ways of G-d through His Name, just as he was once again to request [later on]: Let me know Thy ways, that I may know Thee. (Further, 33:13.) And just as He answered him then, And I will proclaim the name of the Eternal before thee, and I will be gracious unto whom I will be gracious (Ibid., Verse 19.) — meaning that with this glorious Name (Deuteronomy 28:58.) which He will proclaim before him, He will be gracious and will show mercy, and no man can fathom the profundity of His ways — in the same vein He said to him now: “I will be with him that I will be,” meaning, “with My Name that you will tell them, namely, Eh’yeh, with that Name I am gracious and show mercy to man.” And the Gaon Rav Saadia wrote (In his Arabic translation of, and commentary on, the Torah. So clearly mentioned by Rabbi Abraham the son of Rambam in his commentary (Wiesenberg ed., London, 1958, p. 226). See Index in my Kithvei Haramban, Vol. II, p. 564, under lashon, for Ramban’s extensive use of Arabic. In view then of the fact that Ibn Ezra does not mention this interpretation of Rav Saadia Gaon in his commentary, nor is it found in Saadia’s philosophic work Emunoth Vehadei’oth, it may be assumed that Ramban saw it in the original Arabic.) that its explanation is as follows: “[He is the Being] Whose existence has never ceased and will never cease, for He is the first and the last.” The opinion of the Gaon is not far from the opinion of Rabbi Yitzchak, [i.e., that the name Eh’yeh indicates eternity, as explained above]. And the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] has said in the Moreh Nebuchim (Guide of the Perplexed) (Part I, Chapter 63. In Friedlander’s translation: p. 239.) that the meaning of Eh’yeh Asher Eh’yeh is: “He is the existing Being which is the existing Being, that is to say, Whose existence is absolute. The proof which Moses was to give to the elders of Israel consisted in demonstrating that there is a Being of absolute existence, that has never been and never will be without existence.” Now according to these Sages, (Namely, Rabbi Yitzchak, Rav Saadia Gaon, and Rambam in his Moreh Nebuchim, all mentioned above.) it is necessary to explain that the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses that he should tell them this Name and teach them its import. That is to say, Moses was to inform them of this Name and show the rational proofs by which His eternal being or existence would be firmly established among their wise men. The mere mention of the Divine Name — be it whatever it may —is no proof in itself to eradicate the doctrine of the eternity [of matter] from among them, or the calculated heresy of denying the existence [of the Supreme Being] altogether. But this is not the sense of the verse! Rather, [it clearly implies] that the very mention of the Name to them will be the proof, sign and token on the matter they will have asked of Moses. In my opinion, the elders of Israel never doubted the existence of the Creator, as the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] said — Heaven forbid! But this Name does contain the answer to [Moses’ question of G-d], as we have explained it to you. (Namely, that Moses asked by what Divine attribute is his mission to them, whether with the attribute of E-il Sha-dai which stood by the patriarchs, or with the high attribute of mercy with which signs and wonders, new phenomena in creation, will be done to speed their redemption — all as explained above.) He informed Moses that he is being sent to them with the attribute of justice, which is within the attribute of mercy, [suggesting that the miracles which will be done on behalf of their deliverance from the bondage will at the same time be acts of judgment against the Egyptians. This is the sense of Eh’yeh Asher Eh’yeh: “I will be in judgment that which I will be in mercy].” And then G-d said to Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: ‘Eh’yeh’ sent me unto you, thus teaching the unity [of the two attributes, which explains why the Divine Name is not mentioned here twice]. It is for this reason that G-d commanded Moses yet further, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: The Eternal… hath sent me unto you, (Verse 15. The Divine Name mentioned here is the Tetragrammaton.) for this Name, [i.e., the Tetragrammaton], indicates the attribute of mercy, and thus they will know that He hath caused His glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses (Isaiah 63:12.) and He will make new signs and wonders in the world. Thus G-d explained to Moses that the Name Eh’yeh which He commanded him to tell the children of Israel corresponds to this Great Name [the Tetragrammaton] and that they are alike in language, [as both signify eternal existence], and in letters, for the two final letters of the first Name [Eh’yeh] constitute the first ones in the Tetragrammaton. And may the Holy One, blessed be He, show us wonders in His Torah. (See a similar ending in Vol. I, p. 553. Ramban evidently uses the expression in order to indicate that he has merely touched on only the surface of the mysteries here indicated in the text, and one must constantly pray to be shown new wonders that lie hidden in the Torah.)

AND HE EXPIRED, AND WAS GATHERED TO HIS PEOPLE. But the word “death” is not mentioned in his case. Our Rabbis therefore said, “Jacob, our father, did not die.” This is the language of Rashi. Now according to this opinion of our Rabbis, the difficulty arises: Now Jacob applied the term “death” to himself, as it is written, Behold, I die, but G-d shall be with you! (Above, 48:21.) Now perhaps he did not know it himself, or it may be that he did not wish to pay honor to himself. Similarly, with respect to the verse, And when Joseph’s brethren saw that their father was dead, (50:15.) we must say that to them he was dead, or it may be that they did not at all know of this. Now the purport of this Midrash [which states that “Jacob, our father, did not die],” is that the souls of the righteous are bound in the bind of life with the Eternal, (I Samuel 25:29.) and his soul covereth him all the day, (Deuteronomy 33:12.) “wearing a scarlet garment” (A Cabalistic term indicating “the garment” which the soul dons after the death of the physical body.) so that she not be stripped naked, as Jacob’s [soul was privileged to do continually], or which she dons at certain occasions [as do the souls of lesser righteous individuals]. This matter will be understood in the light of what is told in Tractate Shabbath (There (152 b) the story is told of certain grave-diggers who were digging in the ground when they heard the voice of Rabbi Acho’ie the son of Yoshiyahu, who had been buried there previously, rebuking them. He was yet alive in the sense which the Rabbis refer to when they say Jacob did not die.) and Tractate Kethuboth. (There (103 b) the story is told of Rabbeinu Hakadosh who, after his demise, would come home every Sabbath eve and pronounce the Kiddush.)

עין יעקב — The word עין has the same meaning here as in (Numbers 11:7) “And its appearance (עינו) was as the appearance (עין) of crystal” (i.e., the word עין is used as a term of comparison, “as”, ”like”). The meaning is: And Israel dwelt alone like the blessing with which Jacob blessed them (cf. Targum); not like the בדד which Jeremiah used, (Jeremiah 15:17), viz., “I sat alone (בדד) [because of thy hand, for thou hast filled me with Thy indignation]”, but like the assurance which Jacob gave them, (Genesis 48:20) “And God shall be with you, and bring you back to the land of your fathers” (cf. Sifrei Devarim 356:6).

ואמרו לי מה שמו, “(how am I to answer them) when they will say to me: ‘what is (this G’d’s) name?” Nachmanides writes that this verse cries out to be interpreted (not just read). It is quite inconceivable that the verse means that Moses said to G’d: “what is Your name, what shall I say to them?” and that the instruction by G’d to tell them His name would be the kind of אות, convincing sign or symbol that he was trustworthy in his claim to be this G’d’s appointee, sent to orchestrate their deliverance. How could such a simplistic statement as telling them of G’d’s name make believers out of confirmed non-believers? What proof did Moses bring with him that would encourage the people to believe that he indeed had been chosen by G’d to be their redeemer? We see indeed that immediately after G’d told him to relate His name to the people, Moses countered that he was convinced that the people would not believe him. Ibn Ezra understands Moses’ question to refer to the numerous attributes, (names) of G’d, and his wanting to know which of these attributes he was to stress when telling them that he had been sent to deliver them from the yoke of Pharaoh. It was a well known fact that miracles are not performed by the attribute Shaddai, but only by the four-lettered ineffable name of G’d. Ibn Ezra’s words do not appear acceptable at all, seeing that the question of performing any miracles had not yet been raised by either G’d or Moses. Moses had not been instructed as yet to perform any miracles in Egypt; he had only been told to lead the Jews out of Egypt by convincing Pharaoh in G’d’s name to release the Israelites from bondage. Moreover, the people had the tradition that Joseph had spoken of the attribute elokim remembering the Israelites when the time came to take them out of Egypt, (Genesis 50,24) There would therefore appear to be no reason for Moses to refer at this stage to any other possible attribute of G’d. Also the patriarch Yaakov had already told his sons that the attribute elokim would come to the assistance of the people when the time would be ripe. (Genesis 48,21) Seeing that the attribute of elokim had been sufficient to assure Avraham’s single-handed victory over the four Kings who had defeated the five kings of Sodom, there was no reason at all for Moses to suggest that another attribute of G’d need to be invoked in order to make the Exodus from Egypt possible. I believe (still Nachmanides writing) that we must understand matters in the following manner. At that time Moses was already privy to profound prophetic insights, having previously mastered all the philosophic wisdom available at his time, [perhaps also having composed the Book of Job at that time, a book that testifies to the profound wisdom of its author. Ed.] In light of his knowledge of the complex nature of G’d and His attributes, he enquired under which heading G’d had intended to appoint him as the leader of the Israelite nation. He was convinced that this would be the first question by the elders of the people that he would have to answer in order to establish some degree of credibility. The elders knew of two of G’d’s attributes, the attribute elokim, i.e. el shaddai, the attribute which had successfully assisted the patriarchs throughout their lives, and the attribute Hashem, i.e. the attribute under whose aegis miracles of supernatural character are performed. The obvious reason which prompted Moses to raise this question was that G’d had introduced Himself to him as the G’d of the patriarchs, i.e. אלוקי אביך. Seeing that the patriarchs’ lives had been guided by the attribute of shaddai, it was quite possible that the Exodus would also be orchestrated under that heading. If G’d, at that time, had mentioned a specific attribute of His as enabling Him to forthwith orchestrate the redemption of the Jewish people, Moses would not have raised the question at all. G’d’s answer now was to ask Moses to wait until the people would come to Mount Sinai and experience the revelation, when it would become clear that such an event could not occur under the aegis of the attribute shaddai. The people would experience an attribute of G’d with which even the patriarchs had not been familiar. This was the attribute used to create the world, not the attribute employed to merely keep the world functioning as a going concern. Moses wanted to know if he were to reveal this attribute of G’d to the people already at this time. In other words, was he to reveal to them at this time universal aspects of G’d, or was he to restrict himself to representing G’d in His capacity as manager of the earth in its present format? When G’d answered אהיה אשר אהיה, this meant that there was no need for Moses to broaden the people’s theological base by dragging in the universal dimensions of G’d as the Creator, etc. It would suffice to assure the people that the same G’d (attribute) Who had been with the patriarchs would continue to be with both Moses and the people. This attribute would suffice, if called upon during periods of distress, to propel G’d to help His people. G’d’s response to His people’s prayers would be enough proof to them and to the people around them that there was a living G’d Who took an interest in the fate of His creatures. This corresponds to how our sages explained the name אהיה אשר אהיה, i.e. “just as I have seen them through this major problem, so I will see them through any major problems in the future.” It is assumed that the Jewish people, whenever they are in distress, will call upon this attribute of G’d asking for relief. The manifestation of the attribute of shaddai on such occasions is abundant proof of the existence of a living and caring G’d. Moses felt that it was premature to hint at future times when the Israelites might encounter similar distress; this is why he suggested that he introduce G’d simply as אהיה, the four letters of the ineffable name, the attribute of Mercy, an attribute which presupposes that this G’d is the Creator, hence He can operate freely in all of His creation, that He is the universal G’d. The word אהיה is repeated here three times, indicating that in G’d’s approach to the universe, seeing that He is eternal, there are no such concepts as past, present, and future, they are all one, i.e. , היה, הווה, יהיה“He was, He is, He will be,” are parts of the same concept. Only to mortals such as we, are these concepts separate and non-interchangeable time zones. Some commentators see in the expression אהיה אשר אהיה, a command for Moses to tell the people that G’d Himself suffers with the people whenever they endure suffering. G’d explained that the reason why Moses was granted this vision of G’d was precisely because the people had turned to Him, pleading for relief, and that G’d was about to answer their plea. He was sure, He said, that as soon as Moses would tell the people this they would indeed believe him when he said that he had been sent by this G’d. In other words, the answer to Moses’ question “what shall I tell them in order that they will believe me?” is that ”I will be with them.” Still another approach to our problem. Moses made the same mistake as Yaakov had made when he asked the angel in his nocturnal encounter his name, and who had been told that this was irrelevant. Celestial forces, unlike terrestrial phenomena, do not have fixed names, as they adopt names that match whatever task they perform at a given point in history. Seeing that G’d is active simultaneously on many different “fronts,” He ”travels” under many different “names.” [In colloquial terms: “G’d uses many different passports on different occasions.” Ed.] The meaning of the words אהיה אשר אהיה is simply “I will adopt whatever name the occasion and the circumstances call for at the time I manifest Myself.”

Thus Israel dwells in safety, Untroubled is Jacob’s abode, (abode Others “fountain.”) In a land of grain and wine, Under heavens dripping dew.

Yisrael said to Yoseif, Behold I am dying. [The Word of] Elohim will be with you [your support], and He will bring you back to the land of your fathers.

And Israel said to Joseph, Behold, my end cometh to die. But the Word of the Lord shall be your Helper, and restore you to the land of your fathers;

And [prayer] is his essential weapon, as is written (Genesis 48:22), “with my sword and my bow.” Rashi explains: prayer and entreaty. The same idea is expressed in the verse (Psalms 44:7, 9), “For I trust not in my bow, nor shall my sword save me…[but rather,] in those who praise the Lord all day long.” This corresponds to “For My praise, echtom from you.”

This is the reason Yosef received the rights of the firstborn specifically from Yaakov, as in (Genesis 48:22), “I have given you….” “I,” the aspect of mishpat. And this is: “It is a chok for Israel.” <“Chok”> suggests brit, as in (Shabbat 137b): A chok was placed on his flesh. [Therefore,] “… a mishpat of the Lord of Yaakov.” Yosef must receive this sword from the aspect of mishpat, so that he might “order his words with mishpat .” This is the meaning of (Psalms 72:1), “O Lord, give Your mishpatim to the king”—i.e., that Mashiach will receive from the aspect of mishpat .

And the letters of prayer are the Shekhinah, as is written (Psalms 51:17), “Adonoy (My Lord), open my lips”—the spoken word being the name Adonoy. And it is called a keshet (bow), as Rashi explains (Genesis 48:22): “with my sword and my bow”—this connotes prayer.

[Yaakov] also had the power to give a portion of the world to Yosef, as is written (Genesis 48:22), “And I have given you one shekhem (one portion) over and above your brothers.” For through his prayer, he sent an influx of life-force into all three parts of the universe—the lowest world, the world of the stars and the world of the angels. This is [indicated in the word] SheKheM: Shafel (lowly), Kokhav (star) and Malakh (angel). All this [Yaakov] achieved through his prayer, as the verse continues, “…[the portion] which I took from the hand of the Emorite with my sword and my bow”— “with my prayer and supplication.”

Thus it is written (Judges 20:11; cf. Chagigah 26a.) —“All the men of Israel…as one man associated together,” (Cf. Mechilta d’R. Shimon bar Yochai (ed. Epstein-Melamed), on Exodus 19:6 (Jerusalem, 1955, p. 139): “as one body, and one soul.”) just as one man is composed of many limbs; but when they become separated this affects the heart. (Ibid. (also, Mechilta d’R. Yishmael, ad loc.); Vayikra Rabbah 4:6.—See also below, Epistle 31.) “For out of it are the issues of life.” (Proverbs 4:23—On the theme of the innate unity of Israel see also: Jerusalem Talmud, Nedarim 4:4 and comment., ad loc.; Arizal, Likkutei Torah, on Leviticus 19:18; Likkutei Torah, Nitzavim 44a; Igrot Kodesh by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, vol. 2, p. 113 ff.) With us, therefore, by all of us being as truly one man, the service (of G–d) will be established in the heart. And from the affirmative…. (You may infer the negative; Sifrei, Deuteronomy, sect. 46.) That is why it was said: (Zephaniah 3:9.) “To serve Him as one part.” (One part (see Rashi on Genesis 48:22), or: one shoulder (see Targum Yonatan, ad loc., and Likkutei Torah, Derushim L’Sukkot 80d), the meaning for both being: with one consent.)

שכם אחד, “one portion;” the letter א in the word אחד is vocalised with the vowel patach. (as if it were in the construct mode)

אשר לקחתי, “which I have taken;” he meant that he would take this (accept this) in the days of Joshua when the tribes would receive their shares of the Holy Land. In those days all of this would be conquered with the sword and the bow and arrow. The use by Yaakov of the past tense here is parallel to the use of the past tense concerning the money for the purchase price of the cave of Machpelah, when Avraham had said: נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני, “I have already given the money for the field, accept it from me.” (Genesis 23,13) Just as Avraham at the time was certain that Efron would finalise the negotiation, so Yaakov was certain that G-d would keep His promises concerning the Israelites receiving their ancestral land in due course. The reason why Yaakov singled out the Emorite and no other Canaanite tribe is that this was by far the strongest of the Canaanite tribes. We find proof of this in Amos 2,9: ואנכי השמדתי את האמורי מפניהם אשר כגובה ארזים גבהו וחסון הוא כאלונים, “yet I destroyed the Emorite before them, whose stature was like that of the cedars amongst the trees and who was as stout as oak trees.”Another interpretation: when Yaakov speaks of “my sword and my bow,” he quotes G-d, just as we have the line said by Moses in Deuteronomy 33,29: בה' מגן עזרך ואשר חרב גאותך, “by G-d your protecting shield, your sword is triumphant.”Rashi here understands our verse as Yaakov referring to the surrounding tribes making a joint effort to avenge the male inhabitants of Sh’chem whom Shimon and Levi had killed, as abstaining from their intention, i.e. “they did not pursue the sons of Yaakov.” (Genesis 35,5)

ואני נתתי לך, “I have given (allocated) to you;” Rabbi Moshe raises the point that Yaakov was directly responsible for fuelling jealousy between the brothers, commencing already with giving his son Joseph a garment that was visibly more expensive than those worn by his brothers. On account of this error in judgment, the whole family descended to Egypt, only to become enslaved for hundreds of years after initially having been welcomed there. (Compare Talmud, tractate Shabbat folio 10) We must also marvel that Joseph followed in his father’s footsteps by giving his full brother Binyamin far more valuable gifts than he gave to his other brothers (Genesis 45,22). In order to answer these questions we must remember that what Yaakov gave to Joseph was done while he was relatively young and immature, younger than 17 years old, an age at which Ishmael in Genesis 21,14 has still been described by the Torah as a ילד, “a child;” at that time the brothers who were jealous of him had reason to be so. What had he done to deserve preferential treatment by his father? Now that his dreams had come true, not only did they not feel jealous of him, but they were grateful and proud of his achievements. Moreover, they had become economically dependent upon him. Even if he had not treated them well, they were legally obligated to honour him on account of his position. If he gave Binyamin more gifts, that was easily explained by the fact that he was his only full brother. However, what bothers me is that at a time when he had not yet revealed to the brothers who he was, (Genesis 43,34) the brothers of Binyamin must have asked themselves for the reason that this ruler of Egypt who had –according to their assumption- never previously laid eyes on Binyamin, should have given him five times as much as he gave to them. Surely, this would have aroused the other brothers’ jealousy of Binyamin. However, the brothers found a reason for this also, as they considered it as Joseph compensating Binyamin for having insisted that he make the journey to Egypt just because he had not trusted the brothers’ statement that he even existed. Furthermore, I believe that Joseph, already at that point, had decided to reveal his true identity. He was certain that as soon as they would find out that he, Joseph, was a full brother of Binyamin, they would not begrudge him the additional gifts. Some commentators explain the words: שכם אחד, in our verse, the extra portion of ancestral parts of the land of Israel, allocated by Yaakov to Joseph, as referring to the grave in that city in which the remains of Joseph would be interred after the Israelites taking over that country. (Compare Joshua 24,32) The matter can be compared to a parable of thieves who had robbed the owner of a vineyard of a full casket of wine when they were found out by the owner. That owner asked the thieves to do him one favour; seeing that they had already emptied the casket of its contents he asked them to at least return the empty casket to him. Joseph had been sold in Sh’chem. The time had come to at least bring his remains back there. (Compare B’reshit Rabbah, 85,3).

ONE PORTION. Some say that shekhem (portion) alludes to the city of Shechem which was in the portion of the land allotted to Joseph.

With my sword and with my bow refers to God, as in David’s statement, The lord is my rock…My shield and my horn of salvation (Ps. 18:3; II Sam. 22:3). (That is, with the help of God, who is my sword and bow.) However, I believe that shekhem means a portion and shekhem echad is to be rendered one portion. The word shekhem is related to the words shikhmam (their shoulders) and shekhem (shoulder) in, upon their shoulders (shichmam) (Ex. 12:34), and To serve Him with one consent (shekhem echad) (Zeph. 3:9). (A portion is called a shekhem (shoulder) because the shoulder is a part of the body (Filwarg).)

ABOVE THY BRETHREN. More than thy brethren. (The reference is to Joseph’s receiving a double portion in the land of Canaan (Filwarg).)

[WHICH I TOOK.] Its meaning is: which the Israelites will take with their sword and with their bow. (Jacob will conquer the land via his children. I.E. holds that lakachti (took), a perfect, is to be understood as an imperfect, viz., will take. I.E. later explains why Jacob used a perfect.) Jacob singled out the Amorites because there were none among the seven Canaanite nations equal in strength to them. Observe, after the two mighty Amorite kings were slain (Sihon and Og. Cf. Num. 21:21ff.) Joshua said (Josh. 7:7), Alas, O Lord God, wherefore hast Thou at all brought this people over the Jordan, (After defeating Sihon and Og.) to deliver us into the hand of the Amorites, (We thus see that Joshua referred to all of Canaan as the land of the Amorite.) to cause us to perish? Jacob’s statement, Which I took, presents no problems (If Jacob was speaking of the future, why did he use the perfect lakachti (took)?) because the Patriarchs considered the land as theirs from the moment that God verbally gave it to Abraham. (Once God promised it to the patriarchs they were sure that they would inherit it. Hence it was as good as already taken (Ralbag).) God similarly gave it to Jacob, as we read, The land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed (Gen. 28:13).

Meaning of Heb. shekhem uncertain; others “mountain slope.”

שכם אחד על אחיך, “one portion more than to your brothers.” According to the plain meaning of the text Yaakov told Joseph that he had already apportioned the one piece of land which was specifically his to apportion to Joseph. This was the portion which according to Jewish law is the extra portion belonging to the first-born. Seeing Yaakov personally had wrested the town of Shechem from the Emorite by fighting when attacked by the Emorite, he was personally entitled to it as spoils of war. This fact enabled him to apportion two parts to the sons of Joseph and to appoint princes from each without depriving any of Joseph’s brothers of their rightful share or even diminishing their shares. The words מיד האמורי, “from the hands of the Emorite,” may be understood as if he had said מיד הכנעני, “from the Canaanite.” The reason Yaakov mentioned the Emorite was because of all the Cannanite tribes the Emorite was the most powerful and the most aggressive. What did Yaakov mean when he described himself as having taken that city בחרבי ובקשתי, ”with my sword and with my bow?” Did he really mean that he personally had been involved in a battle for the town of Shechem? Yaakov meant that when the time would come for the Jewish people to inherit the land of Canaan this would be preceded by physical warfare. Our verse is an allusion to Joshua 11, 19-20 that “there was not a city that had made peace terms with the Israelites; all were taken in battle. For it was the Lord’s doing to stiffen their hearts to give battle to Israel, in order they might be proscribed without quarter and wiped out, as the Lord had commanded to Moses.” [The only exception were the Gibeonites who misrepresented themselves as not being Canaanites and tricked the Israelites into making a covenant with them]. Actually, you would have expected Yaakov to say: בחרב וקשת, “with sword and bow,” instead of “with my sword and my bow.” The reason Yaakov represented the sword and bow he spoke of as being his very own was that he claimed that success of the Israelites in battle was due to his merit. Compare Psalms 44,4: “it was not by their sword that they took the land, their arm did not give them victory, but Your right hand, Your arm, and Your goodwill for You favoured them.” The psalmist attributes the success of the Israelites’ arms to the merit of the patriarchs. The word “Your goodwill” is a reference to Yaakov. The words “Your right hand” are a reference to Avraham, and the words “Your arm” are a reference to Yitzchak. The facial features of Yaakov are engraved on G’d’s throne. Onkelos translates the word בחרבי as בצלותי, “with my prayer,” and the word בקשתי as ובבעותי “with my entreaty.” We could read the word bekashti as bakashati, “my request,” changing only the vowel pattern. From a defensive point of view, prayer and entreaty may be viewed as viable alternatives to sword and bow. It is also possible that the word בחרבי is a veiled reference to Torah, i.e. the merit of having studied Torah. The patriarchs had not only studied but also observed even minutiae of the Torah precepts. They had divined by means of their intellect what G’d would require of the Jewish people when He would give them the Torah in due course. Our sages also interpreted Yaakov’s words when he sent a message to his brother Esau as informing him that he had observed the 613 commandments of the Torah while employed by Lavan. The words he used (Genesis 32,5) to hint at this were עם לבן ג-ר-ת-י, the word גרתי having a numerical value and the same letters as 613. We find that the Torah is compared by our sages to a two-edged sword in the hands of those who study it and practice it in Shir Hashirim Rabbah 1,16 (compare Psalms 149 6). A two edged sword cuts with both edges. The Ten Commandments, i.e. the Tablets, are also described by the Torah as being two-edged, i.e. as having been engraved from either side (Exodus 32,15). Nachmanides writes as follows: It is very likely that Yaakov acted similarly to the prophets. He aimed his sword in the direction of the Emorites and sprayed arrows in that direction so that he land was conquered before him. Elisha did something like this as reported in Kings II 13,16-17. He said to the King of Israel: “grasp the bow!” When the King had grasped the bow, Elisha put his hands over the King’s hands and said to him: “open the window toward the east.” When the King had opened the window Elisha said: “shoot!” and he shot. Then Elisha said: “an arrow of victory for the Lord.” The report goes on suggesting that if only the King had carried out all of Elisha’s instructions his symbolic actions alone would have secured victory over Aram for him. Yaakov referred to his own symbolic actions with sword and bow which had resulted in the Emorites’ defeat. The words אשר לקחתי, “which I captured,” may be a reference to the birthright Yaakov secured for himself from Esau who was the original Emorite, i.e. who acted as did the Emorites. Alternatively, Esau was compared to the Emorites as he also hunted, using his mouth as his weapon in setting traps for his father. When Yaakov said: “I have given it (Shechem) to you,” he meant that seeing he had come by it by his own merit he was entitled to give it to whomever he wanted. A Midrashic interpretation (compare Rashi) does not see in Yaakov’s assertion the right to apportion the birthright he had himself bought from Esau to Joseph, but sees in it a reference to the actual town of Shechem. Yaakov said to Joseph: ”since I put you to the trouble to bury me in the cave of Machpelah, I for my part have assigned the city of Shechem to be the place where you will be buried.” This accounts for Joshua 24,32 writing “and the remains of Joseph whom the children of Israel had taken up from Egypt they buried in Shechem.”

שכם, another word meaning חלק. The word occurs in the same sense in Psalms 21,13 כי תשיתמו שכם, as well as in Tzefania 3,9 ולעבדו שכם אחד.

אשר לקחתי מיד האמורי, as if the Torah had written this in the future tense, i.e. “which I am going to take from the Emorite.” It is quite common for the past tense to be employed instead of the future tense. When reporting prophecies, Scripture very frequently resorts to describing something in the future as if it had already taken place. [presumably in order to strengthen the belief of the reader in such prophecies, positive ones, to the fulfillment of which one looks forward. Ed.]

When Yaakov said: לקחתי, “I will take or I took,” he did not refer to his own person but to the extension of himself, his children or offspring. The same is true also when he said: ובחרבי ובקשתי, “and with my sword and with my bow.” He referred to the sword and bow used by the members of the tribes of Ephrayim and Menashe in the conquest during the days of Joshua. Although we read in the Book of Joshua 24,12 לא בחרבך ולא בקשתך, that Joshua is reminding the Jewish people that their victory was not due to their prowess in the martial arts, our sages already explained that Joshua did not mean to deny the facts, but to deny faulty interpretations of the facts, by not giving the credit for their success to G’d’s help, or in this case, for the assistance of the merit of their illustrious ancestor Yaakov. This is not the only time in Scripture that we encounter such apparently enigmatic statements. We read in Samuel II 22,3 that David speaks of G’d being “my shield, my fortress and my refuge.” Any fool can understand that David did not consider G’d as an invisible shield, seeing he had refused to use one in his fight against Goliath, for instance. He indicated that without G’d’s help, even if holding a shield in his hand, such a shield would have been powerless to protect him.

When Yaakov made reference to האמורי, he did so merely because this tribe was the most ferocious and powerful among all the Canaanite tribes Joshua faced. We find this confirmed in Amos 2,9 ואנכי השמדתי את האמורי מפניהם אשר כגובה הארזים גבהו, “and I have destroyed the Emorite before them, whose stature was as tall as the cedar’s and who was as stout as the oak, etc.” According to Bereshit Rabbah end of chapter 96 as quoted by Rashi, Yaakov had referred to the city of Shechem, Yaakov telling Joseph that the city in which he would eventually be buried would be part of his tribal territory. The word לקחתי is also understood by the Midrash as in the past tense, and as referring to what had happened there at the time. Shimon and Levi, Yaakov’s sons, had conquered that city, and the Emorite and the Hittite are two different names for the same tribe.

MOREOVER I HAVE GIVEN TO THEE ONE PORTION ABOVE THY BRETHREN. After he had blessed Joseph’s children and made them two tribes, he returned to Joseph and said to him: “Behold, I die; but G-d will be with you (Verse 21 here.) in exile in order to save you from all trouble, and you will increase and multiply exceedingly, and He will bring you back to the land of your fathers to inherit it. I have already given you the one portion in my power to bestow — namely, the portion of the birthright — to be yours above that of your brothers, right from the day that I took it out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow.” All this is a conciliation to Joseph and a manifestation of his love for him, for he informed him that he gave him the birthright, meaning that his sons will henceforth be blessed by becoming two tribes, also in the banners which were assigned in the desert, (See Numbers, Chapter 2.) and in the dedication of the Tabernacle by the princes of the tribes. (Ibid., Chapter 7.) He also gave him his portion in the inheritance which he would acquire when the children of Israel will conquer the Land by sword and bow and war. Jacob thus told him: “I have done for you all the good which I was able to do for you as long as it was in my power to do it.” Jacob’s right in the Land was but one portion for he had no right to divest any of his sons of his inheritance. Only the birthright was his to give to whomever he pleased, and it was to Joseph that he gave it.

OUT OF THE HAND OF THE AMORITE. The meaning of this is that Israel first took the Land from the hand of the Amorite. Sichon and Og were two Amorite kings, and the first great war in the conquest of the Land took place between the children of Joseph and the Amorites. This was the war of Joshua (Joshua belonged to the tribe of Ephraim, Joseph’s son. See Numbers 13:8, and 16.) with the Amorites, and it was in the course of the war with them that the great miracle took place, as it is written, Then spoke Joshua to the Eternal in the day when the Eternal delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, etc. (Joshua 10:12.) And it was out of the hand of the Amorites that the children of Joseph took their portion and inheritance in the Land, as it is written, And the children of Machir the son of Menasheh went to Gilead, and took it, and dispossessed the Amorites that were there. (Numbers 32:39.) The children of Ephraim likewise inherited in the territory of the Amorites, as it is written, But the Amorites were resolved to dwell in Har-cheres, in Ayalon, and in Shaalbin; yet the hand of the house of Joseph prevailed, so that they became tributary. (Judges 1:35.)

WITH MY SWORD AND WITH MY BOW. The meaning thereof is that the Land was captured by them only through the sword and bow. This alludes to that which Scripture states, There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel, save the Hivites the inhabitants of Gibeon; they took all in battle. For it was of the Eternal to harden their hearts, to come against Israel in battle, that they might be utterly destroyed. (Joshua 11:19-20.) He attributes the sword and bow to himself (Saying, with ‘my’ sword and with ‘my’ bow.) for it was his merit which waged war for them and fought on their behalf, not they themselves, even as the verse states it, For not by their own sword did they get the land in possession, neither did their own arm save them, but Thy right hand, and Thine arm, and the light of Thy countenance, because Thou wast favorable unto them. (Psalms 44:4.) This is a reference to the merit of the patriarchs, for by way of the truth, (The teaching of the Cabala.) Thy right hand [is a reference to the merit of] Abraham, Thine arm to that of Isaac, and the light of Thy countenance to that of Jacob. It further appears reasonable to me that Jacob did as the prophets later on were wont to do. He inclined his hand with a sword towards the land of the Amorites and cast arrows there to symbolize that the land would be captured by his children, even as Elisha did: And he laid his hands upon the king’s hands, and Elisha said, Shoot; and he shot. (II Kings 13:16-17.) Now even though Scripture does not relate it here, it is alluded to in this verse. It is possible that this is the meaning of Jacob’s saying, lakachti (I took), (This explains the use of the past tense “I took,” although the land was not actually captured until the time of Joshua.) for from that moment on the Land was taken for his sons.

ואני, and what I say to you now refers to that land, נתתי לך, I have assigned to you, שכם אחד, a share על אחיך, over and beyond the shares which you will divide with your brothers in territory which I and my offspring will conquer from the Emorite in the future with my sword and bow, (in the wars conducted by Joshua). [The author, whose exegesis of the past tense used in Yaakov’s statement is most remarkable, now deals with possible objections that could be raised against his interpretation of Yaakov’s words. Ed.] Even though it is written in the Book of Joshua 24,12 לא בחרבך ולא בקשתך, “not with your sword nor with your bow (did you drive out the Emorite, but because G’d sent scorpions and the like against these people,” this verse does not contradict what Yaakov said here. Firstly, these scorpions did not cross the river Jordan, so how can we understand Joshua quoting G’d as saying “I have sent the scorpions ahead of you to drive out the two Kings of the Emorite, etc.” (same verse)? When reading the words quoted in Joshua before, we must put the stress on the pronoun endings of the words בחרבך בקשתך, i.e. “your sword, your bow. Joshua meant that although on the face of it appeared that your prowess with the sword and bow accounts for your successful conquest, your success was due to the merit of your ancestor Yaakov. The effect of that merit was equivalent to the effect of well trained archers and swordsmen using their physical weapons.

ואני נתתי לך MOREOVER I HAVE GIVEN TO THEE — Because you will take the trouble to engage in my burial “I” give you an inheritance in which you will be buried. And which was this? Shechem, as it is said, (Joshua 24:32) “And the bones of Joseph which the children of Israel brought up out of Egypt, buried they in Shechem”.

שכם אחד על אחיך Jacob meant by the word שכם the actual city of Shechem and said: this shall be to you one portion additional to what you will receive together with your brothers.

בחרבי ובקשתי WITH MY SWORD AND WITH MY BOW — When Simeon and Levi slew the inhabitants of Shechem all the surrounding nations gathered together to join in battle against them and Jacob girded on his weapons to war against them (cf. Genesis Rabbah 80:10) Another explanation of this verse: שכם אחד ONE PORTION [ABOVE THY BRETHREN] — this refers to the birthright (Genesis Rabbah 97:6): that Joseph’s children should receive two portions when Canaan would be divided amongst the tribes (cf. Deuteronomy 60:17; Joseph therefore was to be regarded as the first-born). The word שכם signifies portion. “For thou wilt make them שכם” i.e. thou wilt place my enemies before me in portions (thou wilt scatter them before me); (Deuteronomy 60:8) “I will divide שכם the portion”; (Hosea 6:9) “on the way they murder שכמה” i.e. each man kills someone as his own portion; (Zephaniah 3:9) “to serve him as though they were all but one portion (שכם)” i.e. to serve him unitedly.

אשר לקחתי מיד האמרי WHICH I TOOK OUT OF THE HAND OF THE AMORITE—out of the hand of Esau whose deeds were like those of an Amorite (Genesis Rabbah 97:6). Another interpretation of אמורי in reference to Esau is: he used to ensnare his father by the words (אמרי) of his mouth (cf. Rashi on Genesis 25:7).

בחרבי ובקשתי that is, by means of his spiritual weapons: his wisdom and his prayer (“בַּקָשָׁתִי” cf. The Targumim and Bava Batra 123a).

שכם אחד על אחיך. Das mit שכם verbundene אחד macht es unmöglich, daß hier ein nomen proprium, der Name der Stadt sein könne. Und hieße selbst, wie man gewöhnlich meint, שכם: Teil, Los, so bleibt das אַחַד noch völlig unerklärt. אַחַד ist nie einer absolut, sondern stets einer von zweien oder mehreren, einer unter vielen. Es kann also nicht heißen: Ich habe dir einen Teil mehr als deinen Brüdern erteilt. Es gibt auch im Grunde kein Beispiel für שכם als: Teil. Vielmehr erscheint שכם als Schulter, die entweder eine Würde oder eine Bürde trägt: ותהי המשרה על שכמו (Jes. 9, 5) הסירתי מסבל שכמו (Ps. 81, 7). Wörtlich hieße es daher: ich habe dir die Schulter des einen über deinen Brüdern erteilt, d. h. ich habe dir die Bürde und die Würde des ersten unter deinen Brüdern erteilt, der, nach meinem Tode mich vertretend, an ihrer Spitze stehen und sie leiten soll. — ׳אשר לקחתי וגו, deine Brüder, meine Kinder, die ich mit "meinem Schwerte", mit dem, was — im Gegensatz zu Esaus Schwert — mein Schwert ist, die ich mit meiner geistigen Kraft und geistigen Arbeit dem Emori abgerungen. Jakob spricht: Siehe, ich sterbe, an Erbschaft habe ich nicht viel zu hinterlassen, wir sind in der Fremde. Gott muss euch erst wieder in unser Land zurückführen, dort werdet ihr נחלות haben; hier haben wir nur ברכות und Wünsche. Was ich aber hier zu vergeben habe, das habe ich dir gegeben; es ist dies die Würde und Bürde, mein Nachfolger in Leitung der Familie, der erste zu sein über deinen Brüdern, über meinen Kindern, die die einzigen Eroberungen sind, die ich im Leben gemacht, und über die ich im Sterben verfügen kann. Daß sie mitten unter den Emoritern keine Emoriter geworden, daß ich sie alle nun um mich als meine Söhne, als Fortträger des Namens und Berufes Israel versammeln kann, das sind meine Trophäen, meine Errungenschaften und Siege aus der Hand des Emoriten.

ואני נתתי לך, Yaakov emphasises the word אני in order to explain that he was not violating any of the rules pertaining to the distribution of the land of Canaan to the tribes, seeing such a distribution was not yet something at hand, but was still in the realm of the potential. Seeing that he, Yaakov, had personally conquered the city of Shechem, in spite of this city being part of the land of Canaan, seeing that he had taken it from the “Emorite,” i.e. someone whose deeds were as evil as those of the Emorite, (although the inhabitants had been Hittites), what he was allocating to Joseph now was an actual, a gift bestowed by him now, and had no bearing on any distribution of land conquered by Joshua in the future. Yaakov hints that givers who promise a lot wind up actually not even keeping part of their promises, such as Esau. When Yaakov, at the time, had bought the birthright from Esau, Esau forfeited not only his additional share in the land as a firstborn but wound up without any share in the land of Canaan whatsoever.

בחרבי ובקשתי, through my intelligence and insight (חכמה ובינה). Whereas the weapons of warriors are the sword and the bow, the equivalent weapons of the righteous, the scholars, are their wisdom and understanding. This is what Psalms 45,4 has in mind when the author writes: חגור חרבך על ירך גבור. Our sages in Shabbat 63 already commented on this verse that the psalmist does not refer to actual weapons but to the use of words of Torah as being the tools used by the Torah scholar. [The interpretation of this verse as something allegorical, and almost diametrically opposed to the plain meaning of the text, is disputed by some scholars in the Talmud there. Ed.]

Because you will take the trouble to occupy yourself with my burial. Rashi said, “Because you will take the trouble...” because [otherwise the reason for giving him Shechem] has no connection with the preceding.

Therefore, I have also given you an inheritance. Explanation: I have already given it to you. This is because in the blessings that Yaakov gave them afterward, they were all equal [in inheriting the Land]. Accordingly, Yaakov said to him: I have hereby given it to you, and it will not be included in those blessings. (Maharshal)

This shall be for you one share in excess... Rashi is answering the question: If Shechem means the actual עיר (city) of Shechem, [and עיר is a feminine noun,] why is it written אחד which is the masculine form? Perforce, אחד does not refer to the city. Rather, the verse is saying that the city of Shechem shall be for you אחד חלק (one share), and אחד refers to חלק, which is masculine. (Maharshal)

You will scatter my enemies before me. I.e., this is an explanation of the verse, “You will make them as portions.”

Who acted as if he were an Emorite. There is a question on this explanation: why should Eisov be compared specifically to an Emorite? Thus Rashi brings another explanation. And according to the second explanation: It should have said אמרי instead of אמורי! That is why Rashi brings both explanations. (Maharshal)

His wisdom and prayers. I.e., “with my sword” is wisdom. Just as a sword saves the one who has it, so too, wisdom saves the one who possesses it. This is as it says (Koheles 7:11), “Wisdom gives life to the one who has it.” “My bow” (ובקשתי) is an expression of pleading (בקשה) and prayer.

Consequently, in my capacity as father and the transmitter of the inheritance, I have given to you one portion [ shekhem ] of an inheritance as a gift beyond that of your brothers. Instead of receiving one inheritance, your children will inherit two portions. This is the primary ramification of Ephraim and Manasseh being granted the status of Jacob’s adopted children, on the same level as the other tribes of Israel. This is the portion which I took from the hand of the Emorite with my sword and with my bow. The reference to shekhem here may mean that Jacob gave the city of Shekhem, to Joseph. Indeed, this city was included in the inheritance of his sons, and Joseph himself was buried there. 10

ואני נתתי לך שכם אחד על אחיך, “and I have allocated to you one additional portion in excess of that of your brothers;” this was a reference to the birthright. Joseph became the official firstborn of Yaakov, and that is why his two children each received a share of the holy Land, just as Yaakov’s own sons. According to Rashi, Yaakov referred to the birthright that he had purchased at the time from his brother Esau, as a result of which, he, Yaakov, was entitled to an extra share in the inheritance from his father Yitzchok. I must confess that I do not understand Rashi’s words here. Yaakov did not give Joseph the birthright he had taken away from Esau, but he gave him the birthright he had taken away from Reuven, as is spelled out when he blessed the other sons, and when referring to Reuven, (49,4) that Reuven had desecrated him when he entered his bed-chamber,.claiming it as his abode. The birthright had been transferred from Reuven to Joseph as penalty for the act of desecrating his father. Furthermore, how would the fact that Yaakov had personally taken the city of Shechem from the Emorite have any bearing on his deal with Esau that acquired Esau’s birthright for him? He had been forced to justify giving this extra portion of land to Joseph by making reference to the fact that it had not come to be his through inheritance passed on, but through personal acquisition when he had risked his life for it in war. Nachmanides explains the words אשר לקחתי מיד האמורי,in this paragraph as meaning that the words refer to the time when the land of Israel would be conquered by the sword. Yaakov, already now, tells Joseph that his sons, i.e. the tribes of Menashe and Ephrayim, who would be in the forefront, especially Machir ben Menashe, as we know from Numbers 32, 33-42. According to Nachmanides the promise of בקשתי ובחרבי would be fulfilled in the future when the tribe of Menashe would conquer distant parts of the east bank of the Jordan, such as Gilead, etc, as described at the end of Parshat Mattot. The reference to these weapons were only allusions to the fact that actual fighting would have to take place to secure the land of Canaan as the homeland of the Jewish people for all times. חרב and קשת, sword and bow, are presumed to be symbolical references to the battles against Sichon and Og, both kings of the Emorite tribe. These battles were the fiercest of the conquest of the land of Israel, although they were fought for land on the east bank of the river Jordan. Joshua 11,19 himself testified that not a single city in the land of Canaan made a peaceful surrender to the Jewish army in order to emigrate and save their lives. When Yaakov used the expression לקחתי, “I have taken,” he refers to his moral and legal right to engage in that battle against a people who -according to United Nations statutes- had been rightful owners of the land they dwelt on. Yaakov may very well have done what a number of prophets did when they wanted to make similar points regarding the legality of Israelite expansionary wars. They took arms symbolically, and shot them at imaginary targets, to explain to the king that what they had done symbolically, it was up to the king to do in practice.(compare Kings II 13,16-17).

“One portion more than to your brothers” [48:22]. Jacob said to Joseph: I have given you a portion more than your brothers, so that your two children will be equal to the other children, Reuben, Simeon, Levi. That is, they will take a share in the land of Israel just like Reuben or the other children.

“Which I wrested from the Amorites with my sword and bow” [48:22]. Jacob said: The land of Israel that will be taken from the Amorites, there your two children will be given a share, each one separately, since I have given you the status of the firstborn. Therefore, your children will take two shares. Jacob said to Joseph: therefore, take the trouble to carry me to the land of Canaan, because I will give you a city where you will be buried. This is the city of Shechem. (Rashi, Genesis, 48:22.)

The task of reinterpretation is pursued consistently. When Jacob blesses Joseph’s children, he gives them “…a portion above thy brethren,” which he says that he took out of the hand of the Amorite “with my sword and with my bow.” (Genesis 48:22.) As the rabbis see it, Jacob could not have meant this literally, for the Psalmist declared, “I trust not in my bow, neither can my sword save me”. The “sword” must mean a prayer and the “bow,” a plea, since there happens to be a rather close similarity in the spelling of the two Hebrew words for “my bow” and “my intercession.” (T.B. Bava Batra 123a.)

The verse, "And Abram passed through the land to the place of Shechem," alludes to the synagogue, the place where the Shechinah resides. As it is written, "Moreover I have given to you one portion (Heb. שְׁ'כֶ'ם')" (Gen. 48:22), (Shechem) is the Shechinah, which is fit for (Yosef), as he is called 'righteous.' Because righteousness (i.e. the Shechinah) does not reside anywhere else but in the righteous (Yosef). This is the meaning of "to the place of Shechem," (i.e. the shul). "To the plain of Moreh" alludes to Torah-learning academies, where they teach and instruct Torah to the public.

“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:55). “His offering was one silver dish [kaarat]…” – do not read it as kaarat, but rather as akart, corresponding to Jacob, who extracted [akar] the birthright (The birthright refers to the extra portion of the inheritance that the eldest son received.) from Reuben and gave it to Joseph: “I have given you one portion more than your brothers…” (Genesis 48:22). “Silver” – just as it says: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20), just as he (Silver alludes to the statement made by Jacob, who was righteous.) said: “Ephraim and Manasseh will be for me like Reuben and Simeon” (Genesis 48:5). “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – when Jacob descended to Egypt on account of Joseph, he was one hundred and thirty years old, as it is stated: “Jacob said to Pharaoh: The days of the years of my residence are one hundred and thirty years” (Genesis 47:9). “One silver basin [mizrak]” – corresponding to Joseph, who was cast [shenizrak] from his father and sold to Egypt. “Silver” – after: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20) – what he said to his father (Silver alludes to the statement made by Joseph, who was righteous.) : “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn; place your right hand upon his head” (Genesis 48:18). “Seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel” – as it was through him that seventy people descended to Egypt. “Both of them full…” – Jacob and Joseph, both of them were full-fledged righteous men and both produced tribes. “One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:56). “One gold ladle of ten shekels…” – corresponding to the ten districts of Manasseh, as it is stated: “Ten districts fell to Manasseh” (Joshua 17:5). “One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:57). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:58). “One young bull, one ram [one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering]; one goat…” – these (This is a reference to the three burnt offerings.) are three corresponding to the three generations that Joseph saw from Manasseh that received a portion in the land, (This is a reference to the fact that there were three major families named after the three generations following Manasseh, in addition to the family which was named after Manasseh himself. Therefore, the phrase “the sons of Makhir” refers to Makhir himself, Gilad, and Iezer.) as it is stated: “The children of Makhir son of Manasseh, too, were born at Joseph’s knees” (Genesis 50:23). Likewise, it says: “The sons of Manasseh: For Makhir, the family of the Makhirites, and Makhir begot Gilad.… These are the sons of Gilad: Of Iezer…” (Numbers 26:29–30). Makhir, Gilad, and Iezer – these are three generations that were patrilineal houses that were attributed to Joseph, as Manasseh is attributed to Jacob, just as it says: “And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before my coming to you to Egypt, they are mine” (Genesis 48:5). The fourth, this was Ya’ir son of Manasseh, who received a portion in the land, just as it says: “Ya’ir son of Manasseh went and captured their villages [ḥavot], and he called them Ḥavot Ya’ir” (Numbers 32:41). The three species of burnt offerings corresponded to the sons of Makhir son of Manasseh. (This is referring to what was mentioned above, and is mentioned again since the midrash now also explains what the sin offering signifies.) The goat sin offering corresponded to Ya’ir, who did not bequeath his portion to his sons, because he did not have sons. That is why he called them (The villages.) by his name, because he did not have any remnant, and the sons of his brother Makhir inherited his portion. “And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Gamliel son of Pedatzur” (Numbers 7:59). “And for the peace offering, two bulls” – corresponding to the tribe of Manasseh, which split into two and received two portions in the land, half of it on the east bank of the Jordan and half in the land of Canaan. “Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – these are three species, corresponding to three things that Joseph did on behalf of Manasseh, whom he sought to elevate over his brother Ephraim. The first: “Joseph took the two of them, Ephraim in his right hand to the left of Israel, and Manasseh in his left hand to the right of Israel” (Genesis 48:13). The second: “He supported his father’s hand, to remove it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh” (Genesis 48:17). The third: “Joseph said to his father: Not so, my father, as this is the firstborn…” (Genesis 48:18). Why were they five each? It corresponds to the five women from the tribe of Manasseh who took a portion in the land. These were Tzelofḥad’s five daughters, just as it says: “Tzelofḥad’s daughters speak justly; give them a holding for inheritance…” (Numbers 27:7). They were five, as it is stated: “These are the names of his daughters: Maḥla, Noa, Ḥogla, Milka, and Tirtza” (Numbers 27:1). Likewise, Jacob mentioned them in the blessing of Joseph, as it is stated: “Branches [banot] ran atop the wall [alei shur]” (Genesis 49:22); these are Tzelofḥad’s daughters [banot], who received a portion in the land. Alternatively, why were they five each? It corresponds to the blessing that Jacob blessed them: “May they proliferate like fish in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16), and fish were created on the fifth day. “This was the offering of Gamliel…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Gamliel…”

“The two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi…took” – from the fact that it says Simeon and Levi, we know that they are Jacob’s sons. It is, rather, “Jacob’s sons” – that they did not take counsel from Jacob; “Simeon and Levi” – that they did not take counsel from one another. “Dina's brothers” – was she only the sister of the two of them? Was she not the sister of all the tribes? It is, rather, because they endangered their lives on her behalf, she is called by their name. Similarly, “Miriam the prophetess, Aaron’s sister” (Exodus 15:20) – was she [only] Aaron’s sister? Was she not sister of the two of them? It is, rather, because Aaron devoted himself on her behalf, (He implored Moses to pray on Miriam’s behalf when she was afflicted with leprosy.) that is why she is called by his name. Similarly, “And in the matter of Kozbi, daughter of the prince of Midyan, their sister” (Numbers 25:18) – was she [only] their sister? Was she not a member of their nation? It is, rather, because she gave her life on behalf of her nation, her nation was called by her name. “Each man took his sword” – Rabbi Elazar says: They were thirteen years old. “They slew Ḥamor and Shekhem his son by the sword, and took Dina from Shekhem’s house, and departed” (Genesis 34:26). Shmuel asked Levi bar Sisi, he said to him: ‘What is that which is written: “And came upon the city confidently”?’ He said to him: ‘They were confident in the strength of the elder. Our patriarch Jacob did not want his sons to perform that act, but when his sons performed that act, he said: What, will I allow my sons to fall at the hand of the nations of the world. What did he do? He took his sword and his bow, stood at the entrance of Shekhem, and said: If the nations of the world come to confront my sons, I will battle against them.’ That is what he said to Joseph: “I have given to you one portion [shekhem] beyond your brothers…” (Genesis 48:22) – where do we find that our patriarch Jacob took his sword and his bow in Shekhem, as it is stated: “Which I took from the hand of the Emorite, with my sword and with my bow”? (Genesis 48:22) – “Ḥamor and Shekhem his son.” (As a consequence of the actions of Simeon and Levi, who killed Ḥamor and Shekhem, Jacob took up his sword and bow.)

“Israel said to Joseph: Behold, I am dying, and God will be with you, and He will restore you to the land of your fathers” (Genesis 48:21). “Israel said to Joseph: Behold, I [anokhi] am dying, and God will be with you, and He will restore…” – the son of Rabbi Yosei’s brother [said]: The elder gave them three signs: One who comes [to redeem] with the term anokhi, who will appoint elders from among you, and will say to you pakod, he is the redeemer. (These were Jacob’s signs as to the identity of the future redeemer of the Israelites. Moses fulfilled all three signs; see, e.g., Exodus 3:11, 3:16, 4:29. ) Rabbi Ḥunya removes anokhi, and inserts the ineffable Name in its place. (See Exodus 3:13–14. ) “And I have given to you one portion [shekhem] beyond your brothers, which I took from the hand of the Emorite with my sword and with my bow” (Genesis 48:22). “And I have given to you” a son who was vigilant [shehishkim], and you did not act in accordance with their actions; therefore, the portion will be in your territory. (The midrash interprets the additional portion promised here to Joseph to be the city of Shekhem. This was granted to Joseph, because he did not act as his brothers did in Shekhem, where they sold Joseph into slavery (see Genesis 37:14; Sanhedrin 102a). Alternatively, he did not act as did Shekhem, who raped Dina (Genesis 34:2). Joseph refrained from acting on his desires even when approached by the wife of Potifar (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Pinḥas said: In Shekhem there was breach in the area of licentiousness, and you repaired it; therefore, it will be in your portion. Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya: Rabbi Yehuda said: “I have given to you [one] shekhem” – this is the birthright and the garment of Adam the first man. “Which I took from the hand of the Emorite” – this is Esau. Was Esau, in fact, an Emorite? It is, rather, that he performed the actions of the Emorite. “With my sword and with my bow” – with mitzvot and good deeds. Rabbi Neḥemya said: “I have given to you one shekhem” – this is literally [the city of] Shekhem. “Which I took from the hand of the Emorite” – this is Ḥamor father of Shekhem. Was he, in fact, an Emorite? It is that the Hivite are included in the Emorite. (The Emorites were a larger group surrounding the Hivites, and therefore the Hivites were sometimes called Emorites (see Etz Yosef). ) “With my sword and with my bow” – Jacob did not want his sons to perform that act. (But when his sons performed that act, he said: What, will I allow my sons to fall at the hand of the nations of the world? What did he do? He took his sword and his bow, stood at the entrance of Shekhem, and said: If the nations of the world come to confront my sons, I will battle against them. See Bereshit Rabba 80:10.) But when…

(Fol. 123) (Gen. 48) Which I took out of the hand of the Emorite with my sword and with my bow. Did he indeed take it with sword and bow? Is it not written (Ps. 44, 7) For not in my bow will I trust, and my sword shall not help me? We must therefore explain it that with my sword, refers to prayer, and with my bow, to supplication.

And it is written (Genesis 48:22) "And I (Jacob) have given to you an additional portion over your brothers, which I took from the hand of the Emori with my sword and with my bow." Now did he take it with his sword and his bow? — "my sword" is prayer. My bow ("bekashti") is (my) supplication ("bakashati").

Furthermore it says: Fear not, thou worm Jacob (Isa. 41:14). Why is Israel compared to a worm? To teach us that just as a worm has only a soft and tender mouth with which to strike at a hard cedar tree, so Israel has only its prayers. Idolaters are likened to a cedar, as Scripture states: Behold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon (Exod. 31:3). And yea, the Lord breaketh in pieces the cedars in Lebanon (Ps. 29:5). Whenever their enemies overpowered them, the Israelites would become penitent and would plead and pray. Hence it says: I have given to thee one portion above thy brethren which I took out of the hand of the Amorites, with my sword and with my bow (Gen 48:29). Did he actually seize it with his sword and his bow? Has it not already been said: For I trust not in my bow, neither can my sword save me (Ps. 44:7)? This implies that my sword refers to prayer and my bow to beseeching. Scripture says: And this for Judah, and he said: “Hear Lord, the voice of Judah,” etc. (Deut. 33:7). Similarly, David said: Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a javelin; but I come to thee in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast taunted (I Sam. 17:45). It says also: Some trust in chariots, and some in horses, but we will make mention of the name of the Lord his God (Ps. 20:8), and it is said: There is none beside Thee to help, between the mighty and him that hath no strength; help us, O Lord our God; for we rely on Thee, and in Thy name are we come against this multitude. Thou art the Lord our God; let not man prevail against thee (II Chron. 14:10). Concerning Moses it states: And Moses sent messengers from Kadesh unto the king of Edom … how our fathers went down into Egypt, and when we cried unto the Lord, He heard our voice (Num. 20:14–15). He said to them: Ye exalt yourselves because of your fathers’ legacy to you, but the voice is the voice of Jacob, and the hands are the hands of Esau (Gen. 27:40). Thus the verse The children of Israel cried out unto the Lord indicates that they followed the practices of their fathers. After they cried out to Him, the Holy One, blessed be He, revealed Himself to them, as it is said: But from thence ye will seek the Lord thy God; and thou shall find him (Deut. 4:29).

and take heed that none of your sons carry me, but yourselves. And thus shall ye do unto me ‎when ye are carrying my body to go with it unto the land of Canaan to bury me. Judah, and ‎Issachar, and Zebulun shall carry my bier at the east; Reuben, and Simeon, and Gad at the ‎south; Ephraim, and Manasseh, and Benjamin at the west; Dan, and Asher, and Naphtali at the ‎north. And suffer not Levi to carry me with you, for he and his children are destined to carry ‎the ark of the covenant of the Lord in Israel's camp, nor shall Joseph, my son, carry me, for he ‎is a king, and his honor must be given him accordingly; but let Ephraim and Manasseh be in ‎their stead. And thus ye shall do unto me when you carry me and do not omit the least from ‎what I have commanded you. And if you will faithfully do unto me all these things, the Lord will ‎remember you to all good and your children after you forever. And you, my sons, honor one ‎another and your relatives likewise, and instruct your children and your children’s children ‎after you to serve the Lord, the God of your forefathers, through all the days, that your days ‎may be prolonged in the land, and the days of your children and your children’s children, ‎forever, by your doing whatsoever is good and just in the eyes of the Lord your God, and by ‎walking in all his ways. And thou Joseph, my son, I pray thee to forgive the sins and ‎transgressions of thy brothers in the evil that they have done unto thee, for the Lord hath ‎ordained it for thy good, and the good of thy children. And do not forsake thy brothers, oh my ‎son, before the Egyptian, and do not cause thy brothers any grief, for behold, I have entrusted ‎them to the care of the Lord and to thy care, and it is in thy hand to protect them against the ‎Egyptians throughout thy days. And the sons of Jacob answered unto their father, saying: All ‎that thou hast commanded unto us will we do, oh our father, only may the Lord be with us! ‎And Jacob said unto his sons: Lo may the Lord be with you, as ye will observe all his ways. Do ‎not turn, neither to the right nor to the left, from doing all that is good and just in his eyes. For ‎verily I know that many disastrous evils will befall you in the latter days even in this land, as ‎also your children and children’s children; but serve ye the Lord and he will deliver you from all ‎troubles. And if you shall follow your God and serve him, and if you will instruct your children, ‎and your children’s children after you, to know the Lord, then the Lord will raise up unto you a ‎savior from among your own sons, and through his power the Lord will deliver you from all ‎troubles, and bring you out of this land and bring you back unto the land of your fathers to ‎possess it securely. And after Jacob had finished instructing his sons, Jacob withdrew his feet ‎into his bed and he was gathered to his people.‎

And Joseph fell upon his father crying and weeping, and he kissed his father and cried out in a ‎bitter voice, oh my father, my father! And all the wives of his sons, and all his household, ‎came, and they fell upon Jacob and wept over him and they cried over Jacob in an exceedingly ‎loud voice. And all the sons of Jacob rose up, and they rent their garments and put sackcloth ‎upon their loins, and they fell upon their faces and they scattered dust over their heads ‎heavenwards. And the sad news was told unto Osnath, Joseph’s wife, and she arose and she ‎put on a sack, and she came with all the Egyptian women and all of them mourned and wept ‎over Jacob. And all the people of Egypt that knew Jacob, on hearing this thing, assembled and ‎came likewise on that day to weep over Jacob, and all Egypt wept for Jacob many days. And ‎the women from the land of Canaan came also unto Egypt when they heard of Jacob’s death, ‎and they wept for him in Egypt seventy days. And after wards Joseph ordered his servants, ‎the physicians, to embalm his father with myrrh and frankincense, and with all sorts of spices ‎and perfumery. And the physicians embalmed Jacob according to Joseph’s commandments. ‎And all Egypt, and all the elders and inhabitants of Goshen wept and mourned for Jacob. And ‎all the sons of Jacob and the children of his household wept and mourned over Jacob, their ‎father, for many days. And when the days of weeping were over, at the end of seventy days, ‎Joseph said unto Pharaoh: I will go up to bury my father in the land of Canaan according to ‎what he caused me to swear, and then I shall return. And Pharaoh sent Joseph, saying: Go up ‎and bury thy father as he hath said, and as he hath caused thee to swear. And Joseph arose ‎with all his brothers, and they went up to the land of Canaan to bury their father as he had ‎commanded them. And Pharaoh issued a proclamation throughout Egypt, saying: All those ‎that fail to go up with Joseph and his brothers to the land of Canaan to bury Jacob, shall die. ‎And all Egypt obeyed Pharaoh’s order, and they rose up all together, and all the servants of ‎Pharaoh, and all the elders of his household, and all the elders of the land of Egypt went up ‎with Joseph. And all the princes and officers of Pharaoh, the servants of Joseph, went up ‎likewise, to bury Jacob in the land of Canaan. And the sons of Jacob carried the bier on which ‎Jacob lay, according to all their father had commanded unto them, his sons did unto Jacob. And ‎the bier was of pure gold inlaid with onyx stones and bdellium all around, and the cover of the ‎work was a cloth woven of gold trimmed in fringes and over it were fastenings of onyx stones ‎and bdellium. And upon the head of his father, Jacob, Joseph placed a large crown of gold and ‎a scepter of gold he gave into his hand, and they surrounded the bier according to the manner ‎of kings during their life time.‎

he came nigh unto Joseph and he forced the door open and he came with his brethren before ‎Joseph. And Judah said unto Joseph: Oh my lord, let thy servant, I pray thee, speak a word in ‎my lord's ear and let not thine anger burn against thy servant: And Joseph said unto him: ‎Speak! And Judah spoke unto Joseph while his brethren stood before them. And Judah said ‎unto Joseph: Be hold when we first came unto my lord to purchase food, thou hast taken us ‎for spies against this land, and we have brought our brother Benjamin into thy presence. And ‎why dost thou further carry on thy mockery with us? And now I pray, may the king hearken ‎unto my words and release our brother that he go home with us to our father lest thou perish ‎this day, and all the inhabitants of Egypt. Knowest thou not what my two brothers, Simeon and ‎Levi, have done unto the city of Shechem and unto the seven cities of the Amorites on ‎account of our sister Dinah and what will they not do on account of their brother Benjamin And ‎I with my strength, greater and more powerful than both of them, will come over thee and all ‎thy land this very day if thou do not willingly release our brother. Hast thou not heard what our ‎God who hath chosen us has done unto Pharaoh on account of our mother Sarah, whom he ‎had taken away from our father? How the Lord hath smitten him and all his household with ‎terrible plagues that even to this day all the Egyptians speak to one another of that great ‎wonder. And even so will our God do unto thee on account of Benjamin whom thou takest ‎from our father this day on account of the evils which thou art bringing over us in thy land this ‎day. For our God will remember his covenant with Abraham our father and he will bring evil ‎upon thee because thou hast grieved the soul of our father this day. And do thou listen, I pray ‎thee, unto my words which I have spoken unto thee this day, and send away our brother that ‎he may go lest thou and all the people of thy lord will die by my sword, for all of you cannot ‎prevail against me.‎ And Joseph answered unto Judah saying: Why dost thou open thy mouth so wide concerning ‎these words, exalting thyself over us, saying that there is great strength within 7 As Pharaoh ‎liveth, if I order my powerful men to fight against you, verily thou and thy brothers here would ‎soon find themselves in the mud. And Judah said unto Joseph: It were better for thee and thy ‎men to fear me. As the Lord liveth, if I once draw my sword I will not return it unto its scabbard ‎until I have slain all Egypt this day, and I will begin with thee and finish up with Pharaoh thy ‎lord. And Joseph answered and said unto him: Verily, not thou alone hast all the strength. I ‎myself am more powerful than thou art, and if thou drawest thy sword I will place it upon ‎thine neck and upon the neck of all those thy brothers. And Judah said unto him: Verily, if I ‎open my mouth against thee this day, I can swallow thee up, and thou wilt be forgotten from ‎the earth and be lost from thy kingdom. And Joseph answered: Verily, if thou openest thy ‎mouth I have power and strength to close it with a big rock until thou canst not utter a word. ‎Behold how many stones there are before us, and can I not take one of them and put it into ‎thy mouth and break thy jaws? And Judah said: God be a witness between us, that I have not ‎sought to war with thee from the beginning even until now, only to give us our brother to go ‎away from thee. And Joseph answered and said: As Pharaoh liveth, if all the kings of Canaan ‎were to come with you, you could not altogether take him from my hands. And now go ye ‎your ways unto your father and your brother shall be a slave unto me for robbing the house of ‎the king. And Judah said: What is it unto thee, oh king, or to thy fame? Verily the king sendeth ‎out of his house in presents or in losses abundance of silver and of gold in all the land, and ‎thou continuest to speak of thy cup which thou sayest he hath stolen from thee, while thou ‎hast placed it into the bag of our brother. Far be it from our brother Benjamin, and from the ‎seed of Abraham, to do such a thing or any other person be he king or prince or an ordinary ‎man. And now refrain thou from saying such a thing, lest thy words be heard in the land and ‎people will say: On account of a little silver the king of Egypt had quarrels and fights with these ‎men, and he hath taken away from them their brother for a slave. And Joseph answered unto ‎them: Take then this cup and go your way from me and leave your brother to be a slave, for it ‎is the judgment of a thief to be a slave. And Judah said unto him: And art thou not ashamed at ‎thy words, that we should leave with thee our brother for this cup? Surely, if thou wouldst ‎give unto us a thousand times as much as thy cup we should not leave our brother even for all ‎the silver of all mankind; verily, we should first die for his sake.‎ And Joseph answered and said: And wherefore have you forsaken your brother and you have ‎sold him for twenty pieces of silver even unto this day, and why don’t you do likewise to this ‎your brother? And Judah said: The Lord did witness between me and thee that we have not ‎desired this fight, and now give us our brother that we go away from thee without trouble. ‎And Joseph answered and said: If all the kings of the land were to gather together, they could ‎not deliver your brother from my hand. And Judah said: What shall we say unto our father ‎when he seeth us and behold our brother is not with us, and his soul will grieve over him? And ‎Joseph answered and said: This is what you have to tell unto your father: The rope has ‎followed the bucket. And Judah said: And art thou a king who speaketh such things and give us ‎the wrong judgment? Woe unto the king that is thy like. And Joseph answered and said: There ‎is no wrong judgment in the words I have spoken concerning your brother Joseph, for verily, ‎you all have sold him unto the Midianites for twenty pieces of silver, and you have denied it to ‎your father saying an evil beast hath devoured him, Joseph hath been torn into pieces. And ‎Judah said: Behold the fire of Shechem is burning within my heart. I will burn all thy land with ‎fire. And Joseph answered: Verily, Tamar, thy sister-in-law who killed thy sons, she hath put ‎out the fire of Shechem. And Judah said: If I pluck out one hair from my body, all Egypt will be ‎killed with my blood. And Joseph answered unto him: Verily, such is your manner of doing, the ‎same that you did unto your brother when you sold him, and you dipped his coat into blood ‎and you brought it unto your father, that he should think an evil beast has devoured him, and ‎this is his blood.‎ And when Judah heard these words he was terribly angry and his wrath burned within him. ‎And there was lying before him a stone whose weight was four hundred shekels, and while ‎Judah’s anger was burning he seized the stone with one of his hands and threw it heavenward ‎and he caught it up with his left hand. And after this he placed it under his feet and he sat ‎down upon it with his might and the stone was crumbled to dust by Judah’s strength. And ‎when Joseph saw the action of Judah he was greatly afraid, and Joseph commanded his son ‎Manasseh, and he did unto another stone what Judah had done before. And Judah said unto ‎his brothers let not the man among you think this man is an Egyptian, for being able to do such ‎a thing he must be of the family of our father. And Joseph said: Not upon you alone was ‎strength bestowed, for we also are powerful men, and why will you exalt yourself over all of ‎us? And Judah said unto Joseph: I pray thee release our brother and do not invite ruin upon ‎thy country this day. And Joseph answered unto them saying: Go ye and tell your father that ‎an evil beast hath devoured Benjamin as you have said concerning your brother Joseph. And ‎Judah conferred with Naphtali saying unto him: Go now hastily and bring me the number of all ‎the streets that are in Egypt. And Simeon said unto him: Let not this concern thee, for behold I ‎will ascend the mountain and take one of its large stones and cast it on all the people of Egypt ‎and kill all those that are in it. And Joseph heard all that his brothers had spoken in his ‎presence, for they knew not that Joseph understood them for they thought he understood ‎not the Hebrew tongue. And Joseph, hearing the words of his brethren was in great fear lest ‎they might really destroy all Egypt, and he commanded unto his son Manasseh, saying? Go ‎thou hastily and assemble all the inhabitants of Egypt and all the mighty men, and let them at ‎once appear before me on horses and on foot, with all musical instruments in their hands. And ‎Manasseh went and did so. And Naphtali had gone according to Judah’s order. And Naphtali ‎was nimble footed like a swift stag, so that he could walk upon the ears of corn and they would ‎not bend under him. And he went swiftly and he numbered the streets of Egypt and behold ‎they were twelve, and he returned hastily and told it unto Judah. And Judah said unto his ‎brothers: Put on quickly every one of you his sword and we will come over Egypt and smite ‎them all that there be not left a remnant. And behold, I will destroy with my own strength ‎three of these streets and you destroy each one. While Judah was saying these words behold ‎the inhabitants of Egypt with all their mighty men came against them all with musical ‎instruments and amid loud shouting. And their number was five hundred horsemen and ten ‎thousand footmen and four hundred men that fought only with their hands and strength ‎without swords and spears.‎ And all these powerful men came with great storming and shouting, and they encircled the ‎sons of Jacob and they terrified them, and the earth trembled at that fearful noise. And the ‎sons of Jacob saw these hosts and they were greatly afraid of their lives. And Joseph did that ‎to terrify the sons of Jacob and to pacify them. And when Judah saw that his brothers were ‎afraid he said unto them: What causeth you such fear as long as the mercy of God is upon us. ‎And Judah saw all the people of Egypt around him to terrify them, but Joseph commanded ‎them saying: Touch no one of these men. And Judah drew his sword quickly and screamed a ‎loud and bitter scream. And he smote with his sword, and he jumped all over the ground, ‎continuing to scream at all the people. And the Lord impressed all the mighty men and all the ‎people with great fear of Judah and his brethren, and they all fled at the noise of Judah’s ‎screaming, and terror came over them and they fell one from the other, and great many of ‎them died as they fell. And all of them fled from before Judah and his brethren. And Judah ‎and his brethren pursued them into the house of Pharaoh and they escaped. And Judah ‎returned once more before Joseph and he roared at him like a lion, and he uttered a terrible ‎shout against him, and the shouting was heard at a great distance, even among the inhabitants ‎of Succoth, and all Egypt trembled from the noise of that shouting, and also the walls of Egypt ‎fell from the trembling of the earth. And Pharaoh fell from his throne to the ground and also ‎the pregnant women of Egypt and Goshen miscarried on hearing the noise and trembling, for ‎they were greatly terrified. And Pharaoh sent his servants, saying: What is it that is going on in ‎Egypt to-day? And they came and they informed Pharaoh of what hath happened, and he ‎wondered greatly, and he was exceedingly afraid. And his fright grew upon him, and he sent ‎word unto Joseph, saying: Thou hast brought over me the Hebrews to destroy all the land of ‎Egypt. What dost thou care for that thief whom thou hast taken for thy slave? Let him depart ‎with his brothers lest we perish through the evil they will bring over us, and I, and you, and all ‎Egypt. And if thou art not willing to do this thing and thou de lightest in those Hebrews, then ‎remove from thee all the precious things I gave unto thee and go along with them, for surely ‎they will smite all my people and destroy my whole country, for behold even in Goshen all the ‎women have miscarried for fear of their shouting. See they have done these things simply by ‎their screaming and yelling and what more can they do if they fight with their swords? Surely ‎they will destroy the whole land. And now choose thou between me and the Hebrews, and ‎between my land and the land of the Hebrews.‎ And when they came and spoke unto Joseph all the words of Pharaoh concerning him, he was ‎greatly afraid of the words of Pharaoh. And Judah and his brethren were still standing before ‎Joseph raging terribly, and all the sons of Jacob were screaming at Joseph even like the roaring ‎of the waves of the sea. And Joseph was in great fear of Pharaoh and of his brothers, and he ‎sought an opportunity to make himself known, before they destroyed all the land of Egypt. ‎And Joseph ordered Manasseh, his son, and he went and came near unto Judah, and he ‎placed his hand upon Judah’s shoulder, and Judah’s rage subsided. And Judah said once more ‎unto his brothers: Let no man among you say this is the work of an Egyptian lad, for verily that ‎is like the action of one of my father's house. And when Joseph saw that Judah’s anger was ‎silenced, he approached and spoke unto Judah in gentle words. And Joseph said unto Judah ‎Verily you have spoken the truth, and you have proven your words concerning your great ‎strength, and the Lord who hath pleasure in you may increase your peace. But tell me the ‎truth, why thou art the only one among thy brothers to rage against me, while not one among ‎the others speaketh one word? And Judah answered: Thou must know that I have pledged ‎myself for this boy, saying unto my father: If I bring him not and set him before thee then let ‎me bear the blame through all my days. And therefore have I been the foremost among my ‎brothers after I saw that thou wouldst not suffer him to go with us. And now let me find grace ‎in thine eyes and send our brother to go with us. Behold I will remain in his stead to serve thee ‎in anything thou desirest. And wherever thou shalt send me I will go to serve thee with all my ‎might. If there: be a mighty king who hath rebelled against thee, send me and thou wilt see ‎what I will do unto him and unto his land. And even if he have hosts of horsemen and on foot, ‎and an exceedingly powerful army, I will smite them all, and bring their king's head before ‎thee. Dost thou not know, and hast thou not heard of it, that our father Abraham with his ‎servant Eliezer smote all the kings of Elam and all their hosts in one night that there was not ‎left of them a remnant? And from that day on the strength of our father was given unto us ‎and our seed as an inheritance forever.‎ And Joseph answered and said: Thou art speaking the truth and there is no false hood in thy ‎mouth, for it hath been told unto us that the Hebrews are possessed of great strength, and ‎that the Lord their God hath great pleasure in them, and that no one can stand against them. ‎And on this I will agree to release your brother, if thou wilt agree to bring into my presence his ‎brother the son of his mother of whom ye have said he went away from you into Egypt. And if ‎you bring unto me his brother, I will take him as a substitute for not one among you has ‎pledged himself for him unto your father. And when he shall be brought before me I will send ‎away with you thy brother for whom thou art pledged. And when Joseph spoke these words ‎Judah’s wrath was kindled against him, and his eyes filled with blood for anger, and he said ‎unto his brothers: Behold this man seeketh this day his own destruction and the destruction of ‎all Egypt. And Simeon answered unto Joseph saying: And did we not tell unto thee at the ‎outset that we know not the place whither he went, nor do we know whether he be dead or ‎alive, and wherefore does my lord demand of us such a thing? And when Joseph looked at ‎Judah’s countenance he saw that his wrath began once more to kindle within him. And Joseph ‎said unto his brothers: Verily you have said that your brother was dead or lost, now therefore, ‎if I should call him and he should appear in our presence would you give him unto me as a ‎ransom for his brother? And Joseph called out with a loud voice: Joseph 1 oh, Joseph! come ‎this day into my presence and appear before thy brethren and sit before them, and when ‎Joseph had spoken these words his brothers looked around themselves each one in a ‎different direction to see whither Joseph was to come before them. And when Joseph saw ‎their actions he said unto them: Why do ye look around here and there, I am your brother ‎Joseph whom you have sold into Egypt? Now, therefore, be not grieved nor angry with ‎yourselves that ye sold me hither; for God did send me before you to pre serve life. And his ‎brothers were greatly afraid of him on hearing his words, and Judah especially was exceedingly ‎terrified. And Benjamin, who was in a chamber when he heard the words of Joseph, he ran at ‎Joseph and embraced him, and he fell upon his neck and they wept. And when the brothers of ‎Joseph saw that Benjamin hath fallen upon the neck of his brother and wept with him, they ‎also fell upon Joseph and they embraced him and they wept a great weeping with Joseph. And ‎the fame thereof was heard in Pharaoh's house, saying: Those men are Joseph’s brothers, and ‎it pleased Pharaoh greatly, for he was afraid of them, lest they turn Egypt into ruin. And ‎Pharaoh sent his servant unto Joseph, to wish him joy on account of his brothers. And all the ‎princes of the army and of the hosts that were in Egypt, came to rejoice with Joseph, and all ‎Egypt rejoiced exceedingly about the brothers of Joseph. And Pharaoh sent his servant unto ‎Joseph saying: Tell unto thy brothers and bring down all that they have and let them come ‎unto me and I will allow them to dwell in the best part of Egypt. And they did so.‎ ‎ - And Joseph commanded his steward to bring unto his brothers offerings and gifts and ‎garments. And he brought unto them many regal garments and great many gifts. And Joseph ‎divided it amongst them. And to each of them Joseph gave changes of golden and silver ‎raiments and three hundred pieces of silver. And Joseph commanded them to put on those ‎garments. And he brought them before Pharaoh, and when Pharaoh saw all the brothers of ‎Joseph, all of them powerful men and of comely appearance, he rejoiced exceedingly. And ‎after this they went away from the presence of Pharaoh to go into the land of Canaan, unto ‎their father, and Benjamin their brother with them. And Joseph took eleven chariots of ‎Pharaoh and gave unto them. And Joseph gave unto them likewise his own chariot in which he ‎rode on the day he was made king of Egypt, to bring their father in it unto Egypt. And Joseph ‎sent garments to all the children of his brothers and a hundred pieces of silver to every one of ‎them, and he sent also garments for the wives of his brothers from the garments of the king's ‎wives according to their numbers, and various perfumeries he sent likewise unto them. And ‎he gave to every one of his brothers ten men to go with them into the land of Canaan to ‎attend upon them and their children and all belonging to them in coming into Egypt. And ‎Joseph sent by the hand of his brother Benjamin, ten garments for his ten sons, an additional ‎gift above the gifts sent to the other children of Jacob's sons. And he sent to each of them fifty ‎pieces of silver and ten of Pharaoh’s chariots. And to his father he sent ten asses laden with ‎the good things of Egypt and ten she asses laden with corn and bread and meat for his father, ‎and all those that were with him, for provision on the road. And unto his sister Dinah he sent ‎garments of silver and of gold and frankincense and myrrh and aloes, and all sorts of toilet ‎articles in abundance. And he sent likewise such things to the wives of Benjamin from ‎Pharaoh’s wives. And he gave unto all his brothers and also to their wives, from all sorts of ‎onyx stones and bdellium, rubies and emeralds, and from all luxuries worn by the nobility of ‎the Egyptians. There was nothing left, of all precious things that Joseph did not send unto his ‎father's house. And he sent away his brothers and they went, and his brother Benjamin he ‎sent with them, to go into the land of Canaan. And Joseph went out, to accompany them on ‎the road on to the boundaries of Egypt, and he instructed them concerning his father and his ‎household and their coming down into Egypt. And he said unto them: See that you fall not out ‎by the way, for this thing was from the Lord in order to save the multitude of people from the ‎famine, for five years yet will the famine be in the earth. And he commanded them saying: ‎When you come into the land of Canaan do not bring that matter suddenly upon my father, ‎but act prudently.‎ And when Joseph had finished giving them his orders, he turned: and went back into Egypt, ‎and the sons of Jacob went to the land of Canaan, in joy and happiness to their father. And ‎when they came to the boundaries of the land, they said to one another: What shall we do in ‎bringing this matter before our father? For if we impart it to him suddenly, and tell him all ‎about it, he will be greatly astounded at our words and he will refuse to listen to us. And when ‎they went on until they approached their houses they met Serach coming towards them, and ‎the damsel was exceedingly beautiful and wise, and a skilled player on the harp; and they ‎called her and she came unto them and she kissed them. And they took her and gave her a ‎harp saying unto her: Go, we pray thee, before our father and sit down before him and strike ‎this harp and speak unto him according to these words. And they instructed her concerning ‎what she had to say, and she hastened unto Jacob and she sat down before him. And she sang ‎and she played beautifully upon the harp, and she sang in the sweetness of her voice: Joseph ‎my uncle is alive and he reigneth over all the land of Egypt; he is not dead. And she often ‎repeated these words. And Jacob heard her words and it pleased him greatly, and when he ‎heard her sing it twice and three times, the heart of Jacob was possessed by joy, through the ‎sweet ness of her voice, and the spirit of God came over him, and he knew that all her words ‎were true. And Jacob blessed Serach for singing these words before him, and he said: My ‎daughter, may death never prevail against thee forever, for thou hast revived my spirit, only ‎repeat thou this song once more before me, for thou hast caused me gladness with thy words. ‎And she sang once more the same words and Jacob listened, and he was pleased and he ‎rejoiced, and the spirit of God came over him. And while he was yet speaking with her, his ‎sons came before him with horses and chariots and royal garments and servants running ‎before them. And Jacob arose and went to meet them, and he saw his sons dressed in royal ‎garments and all the good things that Joseph sent unto them. And they said unto him: Be thou ‎informed that our brother Joseph liveth, and that he ruleth over the whole land of Egypt, and ‎it is he who hath spoken unto us all we have told unto thee. And Jacob heard all the words of ‎his sons and his heart fainted, for he believed them not, until he saw all that Joseph had given ‎unto them and all that Joseph had sent along with them, and all the signs he had spoken of ‎unto them. And they unpacked all the things before him, and they displayed all that Joseph ‎had sent, and they gave to every one of them what Joseph had sent him. And Jaco-b knew ‎that they have spoken the truth, and Jacob was greatly rejoiced on account of his son. And he ‎said: It is enough, Joseph, my son, is yet alive. I will go and see him before I die. And his sons ‎told unto him all that had befallen them, and Jacob said: I will go down into Egypt, to see my ‎son and my children. | And Jacob rose up and he put on the garments which Joseph had sent ‎unto him, and he put a turban upon his head which Joseph had sent him after having washed ‎and shaved himself. And all the men of the house of Jacob and their wives dressed ‎themselves with the things that Joseph had sent them. And they rejoiced greatly on account ‎of Joseph that he was still alive and that he was the ruler over Egypt. And all the inhabitants of ‎Canaan heard the news, and they came and rejoiced with Jacob on account of Joseph that he ‎was still alive. And Jacob prepared for them a feast of three days, and all the kings of Canaan, ‎and all the great men of the land ate and drank and made merry in Jacob’s house.‎ And after this Jacob said: I will go down to see my son in Egypt, and then I will return unto the ‎land of Canaan which the Lord hath promised unto Abraham. For I cannot leave my native ‎land. And behold the Lord spoke unto Jacob: Go down into Egypt and dwell there with all thy ‎household. Fear thou not to go down into Egypt, for I will make thee there to a great nation. ‎And Jacob said in his heart: I will go and see my son, whether the fear of his God is still in his ‎heart amongst all the inhabitants of Egypt. And the Lord said unto Jacob: Fear thou not ‎concerning Joseph, for he still continues in his piety to serve me as it will be pleasant in thine ‎eyes. And Jacob rejoiced exceedingly on account of his son. At that time Jacob commanded his ‎sons and his household to go into Egypt, according to the word of the Lord unto him. And ‎Jacob rose up with his sons and all his household, and they went forth from the land of ‎Canaan, from Beersheba, with joy and a cheerful heart they went into the land of Egypt. And ‎when they came near entering the land of Egypt, Jacob sent Judah before him unto Joseph to ‎direct his face towards his location in Egypt. And Judah did according to the words of his father, ‎and he hastened and ran and he came unto Joseph, and they prepared a place in the land of ‎Goshen, for Jacob and all his household, and Judah returned unto his father on the road. And ‎Joseph made ready his chariot and he called all his mighty men and his servants and all the ‎princes of Egypt to go and receive Jacob his father. And Joseph had it proclaimed in Egypt, ‎saying: Whosoever faileth to go and meet Jacob shall be put to death. And in the morning, ‎Joseph went forth with all Egypt, a great and mighty host, all of them dressed in white and ‎purple garments, and with ornaments of gold and silver and their instruments of war with ‎them. And all of them went forth to meet Jacob with all sorts of musical instruments, the ‎drums and fifes, and they scattered myrrh and aloes all along the road. And all of them ‎marched on in that manner, and the earth shook at their voices.‎ And the women of Egypt went up on the roofs and upon the walls to meet Jacob, and they ‎likewise played with drums and with lutes, and thus Joseph and all his people went forth to ‎meet Jacob. And Joseph had upon his head Pharaoh’s royal crown, for Pharaoh had sent it ‎unto him to wear it on the occasion of meeting his father. And when Joseph came near unto ‎his father, within fifty cubits, he stepped down from his chariot and walked towards his father. ‎And all the princes and prominent men of Egypt, when they saw that Joseph went on foot ‎towards his father, they too, dismounted and walked on foot to meet Jacob. And when Jacob ‎and his sons approached Joseph’s camp, and when Jacob beheld the multitude that came to ‎meet him with Joseph his son, it was pleasing in his eyes, and Jacob wondered greatly at the ‎sight. And Jacob said unto Judah: Who is the man whom I see in the Egyptian camp adorned in ‎royal garments with a very red robe around him, and a regal crown upon his head, who hath ‎now stepped down from his chariot to the ground, and who is coming to meet us. Judah ‎answered unto Jacob saying: He is thy son Joseph, the king. And Jacob rejoiced on seeing the ‎glory of his son. And Joseph approached his father and he bowed down before his father, and ‎all the people of his camp with him bowed down before Jacob to the ground. And behold ‎Jacob ran hastily towards his son Joseph, and he fell upon his neck and he kissed him and they ‎wept. And Joseph also embraced his father and he kissed him and they wept. And all the ‎people of Egypt wept with them. And Jacob said unto Joseph: I will gladly die presently after I ‎have seen thy face that thou art still alive and so honored. And all the sons of Jacob and their ‎wives and children and servants and all the house hold of Jacob wept with Joseph, and they ‎kissed him, and they wept with him exceedingly. And after this, Joseph and all his people ‎returned unto Egypt to their places. And Jacob with his sons and his household came with ‎Joseph unto Egypt, and Joseph placed them in the best part of Egypt, in the land of Goshen. ‎And Joseph said unto his father and his brothers: I will go up and inform Pharaoh that my ‎brothers’ and my father's house, and all belonging unto them, and behold they are in the land ‎of Goshen. And Joseph did accordingly, and he took from among his brothers Reuben, and ‎Issachar, and Zebulun, and Benjamin, his brothers, and he presented them before Pharaoh. ‎And Joseph spoke unto Pharaoh saying: My brothers’ and my father's house and all belonging ‎unto them as also their sheep and cattle have come unto me from the land of Canaan to ‎sojourn in Egypt, for the famine was heavy upon them. And Pharaoh said unto Joseph: The ‎best of the land make thy father and brothers to dwell. Do not withhold from them all that is ‎good, and cause them to eat the fat of the land.‎ And Joseph answered saying: Behold I have placed them in the land of Goshen for they are ‎keepers of sheep and therefore let them dwell in Goshen to feed their sheep away from the ‎face of the Egyptians. And Pharaoh said unto Joseph: All that thy brothers will say unto thee, ‎do thou with them. And the sons of Jacob bowed down before Pharaoh and they went away ‎from him in peace. And After this Joseph brought his father into the presence of Pharaoh, and ‎Jacob came, and he bowed down before Pharaoh, and blessed Pharaoh. And then he left. And ‎Jacob with his sons and all his household dwelt in the land of Goshen. And Joseph gave unto ‎Jacob the land of Goshen. And Joseph gave unto Jacob and his household the best things of ‎the land, and they dwelt securely in the land of Goshen, and Jacob and his sons ate at Joseph’s ‎table all the time, except when they ate in their own houses. And all the Egyptians were eating ‎and drinking in the house of Joseph, through all the days of the famine, for they had sold all ‎belonging to them on account of the famine. And Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for ‎Pharaoh, and Joseph supported them with food through all the days of the famine, and ‎Joseph collected all the silver and the gold and the onyx stones and costly garments, all of ‎which they brought unto Joseph from all the parts of the earth when they had no money. And ‎Joseph took all the silver and gold that came into his hands, about seventy-two talents, as also ‎onyx stones and bdellium in great abundance, and Joseph divided it into four parts and he ‎concealed one part in the wilderness by the red sea, and one part by the river Euphrates; and ‎the other two parts he concealed in the wilderness which was opposite to the wilderness of ‎Persia and Media. And Joseph took the gold and silver that still was left and he gave thereof to ‎all his brothers and unto his father's household and their wives, and the remainder he brought ‎into the house of Pharaoh, about twenty talents of gold and silver. And Pharaoh placed it into ‎his treasure.‎ And the days of the famine were over in all the land, and after this they sowed and reaped all ‎over the earth, and they found their yield year after year. They lacked nothing. And Joseph ‎dwelt in Egypt securely, and the whole land was under his counsel, and his father and all his ‎brothers dwelt in the land of Goshen and they obtained possessions in it. And Jacob became ‎very aged and advanced in days and the two sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, dwelt ‎continually in Jacob’s house with the children of the sons of Jacob their brothers, to learn the ‎ways of the Lord and his laws. And Jacob dwelt with his sons in the land of Egypt in the land of ‎Goshen and they gained possessions therein and they were fruitful and they multiplied ‎exceedingly. ‎

It is analogous to a king who had a son whom he placed in charge of all his property. The son said to his father: ‘If you do not give me your throne, how will everyone know that you are fond of me? Only if you give to me the place of your throne will everyone show appreciation for me.’ Thus God gave Abraham the world, as it is stated: “And the Lord said: Will I conceal [something] from Abraham” (Genesis 18:17). Once He gave him everything, he said to Him: If You do not give me the Temple, five hundred cubits by five hundred cubits, You have not given me anything. The Holy One blessed be He gave him everything that he asked, as it is stated: “And I have given you one portion more than your brothers” (Genesis 48:22). When Abraham heard this, what did he say? “God spoke in His holiness, I exulted” (Psalms 60:8).

After we learn that inheritance to sons is to be emphasized, we perforce must follow the first approach, viz.: Since he inherits with one (son) and he inherits with five, then just as when he inherits with one, he receives a double portion of one, so, when he inherits with five, he receives a double portion of one. And it is written (I Chronicles 5:1) "And the sons of Reuven, the first-born of Israel (i.e., Jacob). For he was the bechor, but when he defiled his father's bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph." And it is written (Ibid. 2) "For Judah prevailed over his brothers (to inherit the kingship) and the ruler was to come from him, and the bechorah (the status of first-born) was given to Joseph." And it is written (Bereshith 48:22) "And I (Jacob) have given to you (Joseph) an additional portion over your brothers."

We similarly find that when Jacob was embattled against the Emorites that he referred to his conquest of the city of Shechem as something he had acquired by means of "my sword and my bow" (Genesis 48,22). There was another element to this battle: The prayer Jacob offered up helped him succeed. Onkelos translates the words בחרבי ובקשתי as בצלותי ובבעותי, "with my prayer and my entreaty." It was Jacob's custom that whenever he was involved in a confrontation he would employ three kinds of weapons which our Rabbis have referred to as מלחמה, דורון, תפלה. These may be considered as Jacob's "secret weapons." The weapon called דורון, was gifts to charity; the weapon called מלחמה was the struggle against his evil urge; the weapon called תפלה needs no homiletical interpretation. These three weapons together are what are popularly known as הקול קול יעקב. The weapon of charity is also alluded to in a Biblical passage describing soldiers going into battle. Psalms 85,14 speaks of: צדק לפניו יהלוך וישם לדרך פעמיו, "Charity goes before him as he sets out on his way." We also have a verse in Exodus 30,12 ונתנו איש כופר נפשו, suggesting that a man can use his charitable gifts to help him overcome his blood-guilt, i.e. to save him from danger in war. The fact that only men over the age of twenty had to make this contribution is a clear indication that once one is of military age it may become a life-saver.

As for the phrase “offer him there for a burnt-offering,” there can be no doubt, (14. The doubt that is contemplated is that this command of God would appear to be contradicted by the later command to desist, in v. 12, and that if so, there would appear to be a change in God’s words and decree. This would countervene Kaspi’s contention that God’s word is never changed.) for in the Hebrew language as well as in logic, every expression of movement does not necessarily refer to the consummation of the act. Sometimes the reference will be to a middle, beginning, or even prior to the beginning, on account of its being a proximate or distant potential. (15. Accordingly, the original command was the equivalent of saying, “begin to offer him there for a burnt-offering …” which was indeed fulfilled by Abraham and not countervened by the angel of the Lord.) Thus, for example, we can say of “the child that will be born” (16. Judg. 13:8.) that it writes, eats, is a prophet, or is wise—by virtue of it’s being in potential. As a rule, every adjective and verb will occasionally modify what exists in potential, as they do what is actual, for the term nimṣa’ (“exist”) and hayah (“be”) are ascribed to everything, whether actual or potential. (17. A similar point was made by Kaspi earlier in the work (chap. X, p. 200), in reference to the use of future and past tenses in Hebrew, which Kaspi believes reflects the Aristotelian doctrine of actuality and potentiality. Here Kaspi extends his observations to include the injunctive form; i.e., a command to act may only be a command to create the potential for that act. See also above pp. 49 ff.) Furthermore, what exists (in actuality) only in the soul (is to be considered) as if existing outside of it as well. So, too, what exists only as the spoken word, (is to be considered) as if existing outside the soul. Proof are the words of the writer of the Torah, who, when he wrote, “I was restored unto mine office and he was hanged,” (18. Gen. 41:13.) revealed (this truth), for that had only existed as the spoken word. (19. What Kaspi means is that the verse implies that the chief butler considered Joseph to have caused the baker to be hung and the butler to be reinstated. Such an opinion is referred to by Ibn Ezra in his comments on this verse. According to such an approach, what existed only in potential was already actualized in Joseph’s mind. This accords with Kaspi’s statement (Maṣref La-Kesef, MK II 90) that what exists in the mind is no less than what exists outside of it, while speech, too, confers existence upon that of which it speaks.) He also wrote that Jacob said, “which I took out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow,” (20. Gen. 48:22. In the Maṣref La-Kesef (MK II 104) Kaspi says that this verse will be explained in the Gevia‘ Kesef.) which was (only) potential. (21. He means that even though this was only to be realized at some future time, in Jacob’s mind it was realized and actualized already, and for this reason Jacob spoke of it in the past tense. Ibn Ezra’s commentary to that verse records a similar interpretation.) He further wrote, regarding Jeremiah, “and you gave them wine to drink,” (22. Jer. 35:2, which the JPS translation has, “and give them wine to drink,” but in Heb. ve-hishḳita.) (even though) it was still in potential and close to realization. In the context of Jeremiah it is written, regarding the unspoken and spoken word, “See, I have set thee this day over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root and to pull down, and to destroy and to overthrow; to build and to plant,” (23. Jer. 1:10.) i.e., that the villages and the houses (would be destroyed by Jeremiah) by hand, but not rebuilt by (Jeremiah’s) hand. (24. He means here too that Jeremiah considered those potential events to be already actualized, even though he would do no more than speak to attain those goals.) There are several such metaphors in Scripture. All this is true in accordance with true logic. These are logical principles upon which the entire Torah and Prophets depend. As for the rest of this vision, I already dealt with those matters at length.

The apparent meaning of this verse relates to the field as the source of sustenance for the world. As it says in Kohelet (5:8) "Even the King is subservient to the field," meaning even the king worries about the produce of the field. According to this explanation, we don't understand the message of the verse. But there is a deeper meaning to the word siach (bushes) based on the gemara Avoda Zara(7b), "Siach means prayer as the Torah says (Bereshit 24:63) 'And Isaac went forth to pray (lasuach) in the field'". Tosafot adds that it means fixed prayer also known as avoda shebalev (service of the heart). From the very start of creation God established that earning one's livelihood in the normal way of the world is involved with entreating God for His Providence by prayer or by sacrifices where possible. Both of these are called avoda (service), more than other mitzvot (commandments) of the Torah. Based on the verse (Mishlei 12:11) "He who tills (oved) his soil will be sated with bread" we may explain that all of man's activities can be performed to earn a livelihood or for some other purpose, but tilling the soil is done only to earn one's livelihood. And such is the difference between the avoda of performing other mitzvot and the avoda of prayer or sacrifices. The reward for observing other mitzvot is given in olam haba (the world to come) and also in olam haze (this world) one may receive rewards of wealth or honor, measure-for-measure. The reward for prayer and sacrifices, however, is primarily livelihood, as seen in gemara Ketubot (10b) which interprets the word mizbeach (altar) as being related to nourishment (see also H.D. Bamidbar xx:xx) and also in gemara Shabat (10a) which states that fixed prayer sustains life. (See also Harchev Davar Bereshit 48:22.) The blessings recited over each type food also promote the abundance of that type as seen in gemara Berachot (35b) which considers someone who eats without reciting the blessing to be stealing from God and from the people of Israel and to be as evil as Yeravam ben Navat .(Based on Mishlei 28:24 " He who robs his father or his mother and says, "This is not a sin," is the companion of a destroyer.") The explanation is that by not reciting the blessing one denies God the pleasure of providing an abundance of that food, in effect stealing from Him and from the people of Israel. And such a person is a companion of Yeravam who prevented the people from bringing sacrifices, thus denying them livelihood. (See Melachim I chapter 12.)

Later in the same chapter, he says: “I am about to die; but God will be with you and bring you back to the land of your fathers. And now, I assign to you one portion more than to your brothers, which I wrested from the Amorites with my sword and bow” (Gen. 48:21–22). There are many interpretations of this verse, but according to Rashi, “This refers to the birthright, that Joseph’s children should receive two portions when Canaan would be divided amongst the tribes.” Jacob’s other children would receive one portion, while Joseph would receive two, one for each of his sons Ephraim and Manasseh.

[AND LAMECH SAID…] Note, this (Verses 23 and 24. The reason is that I.E. understands verses 23 and 24 to be an attempt by Lamech to induce his wives to cohabit with him. However, verses 20 through 22 tell us that they in fact did so. Hence verses 23 and 24 must describe what happened before verses 20-22. Its meaning is that Lamech had already said to Adah and Zillah. Va-yomer is thus a pluperfect (Krinsky).) should have appeared earlier. I have already noted two similar examples of this in my earlier comments. (See I.E.’s comment on Gen. 1:9.) Three additional examples are: that the man took a golden ring (Gen. 24:22); (This is followed by: and said: Whose daughter art thou (Gen. 24:23). Now, would the servant give a golden ring to the girl before asking her who she was? Therefore Gen. 24:23 must be rendered: And he already said, Whose daughter art thou (Krinsky).) And the Lord said unto Moses, say unto the children of Israel: Ye are a stiff-necked people (Ex. 33:5); (This is preceded by: And when the people heard these evil tidings (v. 4). However, the evil tidings are reported in verse 5. Thus verse 5 should precede verse 4. Hence the meaning of And when the people heard (v. 4) is: and when the people had heard; i.e., when they heard the following, namely what is reported in the next verse (Meijler).) and And I besought the Lord at that time (Deut. 3:23). (Cf. I.E.’s comment on Deut. 3:23. What is reported in this verse took place before Deut. 3:21, viz., And I commanded Joshua, etc. Moses besought God before he commanded Joshua not to fear the kings of Canaan. Hence Deut. 3:23 is to be rendered as And I had besought the Lord. Ibid. I. E.’s commentary.) As to our verse, it is to be interpreted as our sages did. The rabbis tell us that Adah and Zillah were afraid to bear children because they feared that their offspring, who were the seventh generation from Cain, would die or be killed as punishment for Cain’s sin. Therefore Lamech said to them, “I am in truth the seventh generation (From Cain. However, in truth Lamech lied to them. He was the sixth and not the seventh generation from Cain (Filwarg).) and if a man would wound me or a child bruise me, then I would kill them.” I have slain is used in place of I will slay. (Haragti is a perfect.) Similar examples are: I will give (natati) (Literally, I gave.) the price of the field (Gen. 23:13), and which I took out (According to I.E., I took (lakachti) means I will take.) of the hand of the Amorite (Gen. 48:22). There are many similar instances. (The point is that the Bible occasionally uses a perfect in place of an imperfect.)

With the completion of two rounds, six [orations] in each round, (Leviticus 24:6) the first concerning the suffering of the righteous and the second the prosperity of the wicked; and after the wrangler Job had triumphed over all of them with his answers, his bows and his arrows (Genesis 48:22); Eliphaz now tries, for one last time, to fit his arrow to the bowstring (Psalms 11:2) in order to counter-attack at the gate (Isaiah 28:6) in a single speech that addresses both issues. In doing so, he devises a new approach, one with fine insight and knowledge (Psalms 119:66), according to which it is out of wisdom on God's part, and with particular intent, that the rewards of the righteous and the punishments of the wicked are not immediately disbursed in this world. This is done so as to ensure that the worship of God may be selfless, motivated neither by love of reward nor by fear of punishment.

הוא וכל העם אשר עמו, “he and all the people who were with him.” It is recorded in a Midrash called מלחמות השם, (and quoted by Nachmanides) that the neighbouring towns of Shechem did indeed gather together and fought three battles against he sons of Yaakov. Had it not been for their father Yaakov who personally girded himself with his sword and other weapons, they would indeed all have been in mortal danger. Our sages refer to this when they interpret the words of Yaakov on his deathbed when he described himself as personally having taken the town of Shechem from the Emorite with his sword and bow (Genesis 48,22). It is the custom of the Bible to furnish us with only the barest details of such encounters, seeing that the kind of miracle which G’d employed was a “hidden miracle,” i.e. not a miracle in which known laws of nature have been visibly changed. Another example of the Bible being sparse with information about such encounters is what happened to Avraham in Ur Casdim i.e. when Nimrod threw him into a furnace and he escaped unharmed. The wars fought by the sons of Esau against the people of Chorite (36,21) are similarly not mentioned here. The Torah contents itself by referring to the “hidden” miracle by simply writing that Yaakov and all those with him arrived at their next destination, i.e. that not a single casualty was sustained by Yaakov’s entourage during the attacks upon them by the Emorites.

?ויאמר.. במה אדע כי אירשנה, he meant: “how do I know that my son will inherit it?” We have a similar construction in Genesis 48,22 אשר לקחתי מיד האמורי, where Yaakov also does not mean that he, personally, had battled the Emorite, but that his sons had done so successfully. The meaning of the words במה אדע cannot be that the same man who had just been given credit for his utter faith in G’d now has developed doubts, nothing having occurred to cause such doubts. He wanted to know how he could be certain that when his sons, i.e. offspring, would inherit the land that it would remain theirs forever. Perhaps, due to some sin, future generations might forfeit their claim to the land of Canaan, just as the present occupants had forfeited their claim through their sins. Unless they had, why would G’d want to dispossess them? He hoped that just as G’d had shown him the stars as an illustration that his offspring would be people of great substance, so G’d would show him a further illustration of a means by which his offspring would reinforce their title to that land once they had settled in it.

AND THE SONS OF JACOB ANSWERED SHECHEM AND HAMOR HIS FATHER WITH SUBTLETY. Now Hamor and Shechem spoke to her father and her brothers, (Verse 11 here.) but the patriarch did not answer them at all as his sons spoke in his place on this matter out of respect for him for since the affair was a source of shame to them, they did not want him to speak about it at all. There is a question which may be raised here. It would appear that they answered with the concurrence of her father and his advice for they were in his presence, and it was he who understood the answer which they spoke with subtlety, and, if so, why was he angry afterwards? (Further, Verse 30. See also Ramban further, 49:5.) Moreover, it is inconceivable that Jacob would have consented to give his daughter in marriage to a Canaanite who had defiled her. Now surely all the brothers gave that answer with subtlety, while Simeon and Levi alone executed the deed, and the father cursed only their wrath. (Genesis 49:7.) [But if all the brothers shared responsibility for the answer and the plan, why did Jacob single out only Simeon and Levi for chastisement?] The answer is that the craftiness lay in their saying that every male of theirs be circumcised, (Verse 15 here.) as they thought that the people of the city will not consent to it. Even if perchance they will listen to their prince and they will all become circumcised, they will come on the third day, when they were in pain, (Verse 25 here.) and will take their daughter (“Daughter.” in Tur: “sister.”) from the house of Shechem. Now this was the advice of all the brothers and with the permission of their father, but Simeon and Levi wanted to take revenge of them and so they killed all the men of the city. It is possible that Jacob’s anger in cursing their wrath (Genesis 49:7.) was because they killed the men of the city who had committed no sin against him; they should have killed Shechem alone. It is this which Scripture says, And the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father with subtlety, and spoke, because he had defiled Dinah their sister, for they all agreed to speak to him craftily because of the base deed which he had done to them. Now many people ask: “But how did the righteous sons of Jacob commit this deed, spilling innocent blood?” The Rabbi (Moshe ben Maimon) answered in his Book of Judges, (Hilchoth Melachim, IX, 14, with slight textual changes. The Book of Judges is the last of the fourteen books which comprise Maimonides’ great life work: The Mishneh Torah, or Yad Hachazakah.) saying that “sons of Noah” (Or “a Noachide,” a term denoting the human race. See Seder Bereshith, Note 222.) are commanded concerning Laws, and thus they are required to appoint judges in each and every district to give judgment concerning their six commandments (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) which are obligatory upon all mankind. “And a Noachide who transgresses one of them is subject to the death-penalty by the sword. If he sees a person transgressing one of these seven (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) laws and does not bring him to trial for a capital crime, he who saw him is subject to the same death-penalty. It was on account of this that the people of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty because Shechem committed an act of robbery and they saw and knew of it, but they did not bring him to trial.” But these words do not appear to me to be correct for if so, our father Jacob should have been the first to obtain the merit of causing their death, and if he was afraid of them, why was he angry at his sons and why did he curse their wrath a long time after that and punish them by dividing them and scattering them in Israel? (Genesis 49:7.) Were they not meritorious, fulfilling a commandment and trusting in G-d Who saved them? In my opinion, the meaning of “Laws” which the Rabbis have counted among their seven Noachidic commandments (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) is not just that they are to appoint judges in each and every district, but He commanded them concerning the laws of theft, overcharge, wronging, and a hired man’s wages; the laws of guardians of property, forceful violation of a woman, seduction, principles of damage and wounding a fellowman; laws of creditors and debtors, and laws of buying and selling, and their like, similar in scope to the laws with which Israel was charged, and involving the death-penalty for stealing, wronging or violating or seducing the daughter of his fellowman, or kindling his stack, or wounding him, and their like. And it is also included in this commandment that they appoint judges for each and every city, just as Israel was commanded to do, (Deuteronomy 16:18.) but if they failed to do so they are free of the death-penalty since this is a positive precept of theirs [and failing to fulfill a positive precept does not incur the death-penalty]. The Rabbis have only said: (Sanhedrin 57a.) “For violation of their admonishments there is the death-penalty,” and only a prohibition against doing something is called an “admonishment.” And such is the purport of the Gemara in Tractate Sanhedrin. (58b. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 192.) And in the Jerusalem Talmud (Not found in our editions. See my Hebrew commentary, ibid.) they have said: “With respect to Noachide laws, a judge who perverts justice is to be slain. If he took a bribe he is to be slain. With respect to Jewish laws, [if after having heard both parties] you know perfectly well what the proper legal decision should be, you are not permitted to withdraw from the case without rendering a decision, and if you know that it is not perfectly clear to you, you may withdraw from the case. But with respect to their laws, even though you know the law perfectly well you may withdraw from it.” From this it would appear that a non-Jewish judge may say to the litigants, “I am not beholden to you,” for it is only in Israel that there is an additional admonishment — “Lo thaguru’ (ye shall not be afraid) of the face of any man, (Deuteronomy 1:17.) meaning, “You shall not gather in, [i.e., restrain], your words before any man” (Sanhedrin 6b. This explanation is based upon the common root of the words thaguru and ogeir (gathering) as in the expression, gathering in summer, (Proverbs 10:5).) — and surely he is not to be slain for failing to make himself chief, overseer, or ruler (Proverbs 6:7. ) in order to judge superiors. [Ramban thus disagrees with Rambam, who writes that the people of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty by not having brought Shechem to justice.] Moreover, why does the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] have to seek to establish their guilt? Were not the people of Shechem and all seven nations (Deuteronomy 7:1.) idol worshippers, perpetrators of unchaste acts, and practitioners of all things that are abominable to G-d? In many places Scripture loudly proclaims concerning them: Upon the high mountains, and upon their hills, and under every leafy tree, etc.; (Ibid., 12:2.) Thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations, etc.? (Ibid., 18:9.) For all these abominations have the men of the land done, etc. (Leviticus 18:27.) However, it was not the responsibility of Jacob and his sons to bring them to justice. But the matter of Shechem was that the people of Shechem were wicked [by virtue of their violation of the seven Noachide laws] (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) and had thereby forfeited their lives. Therefore Jacob’s sons wanted to take vengeance of them with a vengeful sword, and so they killed the king and all the men of his city who were his subjects, obeying his commands. The covenant represented by the circumcision of the inhabitants of Shechem had no validity in the eyes of Jacob’s sons for it was done to curry favor with their master [and did not represent a genuine conversion]. But Jacob told them here that they had placed him in danger, as it is said, You have troubled me, to make me odious, (Verse 30 here.) and there, (Genesis 49:7.) [i.e., at the time he blessed the other children], he cursed the wrath of Simeon and Levi for they had done violence to the men of the city whom they had told in his presence, And we will dwell with you, and we will become one people. (Verse 16 here.) They would have chosen to believe in G-d and trust their word, and perhaps they might have indeed returned to G-d and thus Simeon and Levi killed them without cause for the people had done them no evil at all. It is this which Jacob said, Weapons of violence are their kinship. (Genesis, 49:5.) And if we are to believe in the book, ‘The Wars of the Sons of Jacob,’ (This is the Midrash Vayisu. See Eisenstein, Otzar Midrashim, p. 157, and L. Ginzberg’s, The Legends of the Jews, Vol. I, pp. 404-411.) their father’s fear was due to the fact that the neighbors of Shechem gathered together and waged three major wars against them, and were it not for their father who also donned his weapons and warred against them, they would have been in danger, as is related in that book. Our Rabbis have mentioned something of this conflict in their commentary on the verse, Which I took out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow. (Further, 48:22.) They said, (As quoted here, the comment appears in Rashi, ibid. See also Bereshith Rabbah 80:9.) “All the surrounding nations gathered together to join in battle against them, and Jacob donned his weapons to war against them,” just as Rashi writes there. (Further, 48:22.) Scripture, however, is brief about this because it was a hidden miracle, (See Ramban above, 17:1. ) for the sons of Jacob were valiant men, and it appeared as if their own arm saved them. (Psalms 44:4.) Scripture is similarly brief about the matter of Abraham in Ur of the Chaldees, (See Ramban above, 11:58.) and it did not at all mention Esau’s wars with the Horites. Instead, Scripture mentions here that there was the terror of G-d upon the cities that were round them, (Further, 35:5.) and they did not all assemble to pursue after the sons of Jacob (Further, 35:5.) for they would have fallen upon them as the sand which is on the sea-shore in multitude. (I Samuel 13:5.) And this is the meaning of the terror of G-d, (Further, 35:5.) for the terror and dread (See Exodus 15:16.) of the military prowess they had seen fell upon them. Therefore Scripture says, And Jacob came to Luz… he and all the people that were with him, (Further, 35:6.) in order to inform us that not one man among them or their servants was lost in warfare. (See Numbers 31:49.)

that I would allot a portion I shall divide the land of my enemies to Israel, like (Gen. 48: 22): “one portion (שכם) more than your brethren.”

לרב תרבה נחלתו, a reference to the amount of land, for although the land was being divided 12 tribes in shares of equal value in terms of money, the size of the allocations varied according to the quality of the soil each tribe received. A tribe who numbered many souls received a quantitatively larger piece of real estate as is spelled out here by the words לרב תרבו נחלתו, “you shall give a larger inheritance to the numerically superior tribe.” This is the reason why Menashe and Ephrayim received 2 separate territories seeing that their father Joseph had been a firstborn and treated as such in Yaakov’s final blessing, they were entitled to two such shares. (Genesis 48,22) This is also the way we must understand Chronicles I 5,1 ובחללו יצועי אביו ניתנה בכורתו ליוסף בן ישראל, “and when he defiled the bed of his father his birthright was given to Joseph, son of Yisrael.” Shimon, who numbered fewer people than any other tribe at this count, received a relatively small parcel of land, which itself was an enclave within the territory allocated to the tribe of Yehudah. (compare Joshua 19,9 on this subject) This also was the fulfillment of Yaakov’s wish in Genesis 49,7 “I will divide both Levi and Shimon among the tribes of Israel.”

Genesis 48:1-22

Yaakov, near to death, blesses his grandsons (Rahel’s!) in moving terms, bringing full circle many of the motifs of his life. Elder and younger sons are switched by the blind Patriarch, who this time, though, is one who is fully aware of their identities. As in both literature and life, a dying man sees both past (here) and future (the next chapter) with great clarity, as in a vision.

[26] For this reason too Jacob gives as a special portion to Joseph Shechem (Gen. 48:22), the things of the body and of the senses, as he is occupied in toiling at these things, but to Judah who openly acknowledges God he gives not presents, but praise and hymns and hallowed songs from his brethren (Gen. 49:8). Jacob receives Shechem not from God, but by dint of “sword and bow,” words that pierce and parry. For the wise man subjects to himself the secondary as well as the primary objects, but, having subjected them, does not keep them, but bestows them on him to whose nature they are akin.

The baraita cites additional related verses: And with regard to Jacob’s bequest to Joseph, the verse states: “Moreover I have given to you one portion above your brothers, which I took out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow” (Genesis 48:22). The baraita explains the verse: But is it so that Jacob took the portion with his sword and with his bow? But isn’t it already stated: “Through You do we push down our adversaries; through Your name do we trample those that rise against us. For I trust not in my bow, neither can my sword save me” (Psalms 44:6–7)? Rather, what is the meaning of “with my sword”? This is referring to prayer. What is the meaning of “with my bow”? This is referring to petition. This concludes the baraita.

Later in the same chapter, he says: “I am about to die; but God will be with you and bring you back to the land of your fathers. And now, I assign to you one portion more than to your brothers, which I wrested from the Amorites with my sword and bow” (Bereshit 48:21–22). There are many interpretations of this verse, but according to Rashi, “This refers to the birthright, that Yosef’s children should receive two portions when Canaan would be divided amongst the tribes.” Yaakov’s other children would receive one portion, while Yosef would receive two, one for each of his sons Efrayim and Menashe.

I have given you one share more than your brothers, which I took from the hand of the Amorite with my sword [prayer] and with my bow [plea].

And I, behold, I have given thee one portion. Above thy brethren, the robe of the first Adam. Abraham the father of my father took it from the hands of Nimrod the Wicked, and gave it to Izhak my father; and Izhak my father gave it to Esau, and I took it from the hands of Esau my brother, not with my sword nor with my bow, but through my righteousness and my good works.

and I, behold, I have given to thee the city of Shekem, one portion for a gift above thy brethren, which I took from the hand of the Amoraee at the time that you went into the midst of it, and I arose and helped you with my sword and with my bow.

And Jacob called to his sons and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you what will happen to you in the end of days. (Genesis 49:1) Jacob said, “What will happen” – because the redemption will seem to just happen. (The word mikreh in Hebrew means “an occurrence,” and has the implication of a chance happening.) Everyone will be busy with their work, not thinking about it at all, and suddenly, the Messiah will come. Yalkut Moshe, Vayechi

Deuteronomy 31,1. “Moses went and spoke all these ‎words to the whole people of Israel.” This verse ‎‎[seeing that the Torah does not tell us from where Moses ‎walked to where, Ed.] may become easier to understand ‎when we consider that our sages, when referring to the man ‎leading the congregation in prayer sometimes refer to him as ‎descending in front of the Ark, whereas on other occasions they ‎describe him as ‎עובר לפני התיבה‎, ”walking past” the front of the ‎Ark. When a tzaddik is engaged in prayer he needs to ‎attach himself to the letters of his prayer, i.e. ‎תיבות‎, [an alternate ‎meaning of ‎תיבה‎,] which in turn gives his prayer guidance and ‎direction as a result of which his prayers focus better on their ‎objective. There are some outstanding tzaddikim who are ‎not in need of this guidance, but on the contrary, give deeper ‎meaning to each of these letters and words. The latter type of ‎‎tzaddik was Moses, who, in the celestial hierarchy ‎represented the Matronita, as we know from the Zohar ‎where Moses is described as the Matronita’s husband in the ‎sense of “dominant companion of this Matronita who is ‎portrayed as a combination of the emanation of malchut ‎and Torah.” At any rate, the expression ‎יורד לפני התיבה‎, “descending ‎beneath the Ark,” i.e. the word or letter, means receiving one’s ‎spiritual inspiration from above, whereas people leading the ‎congregation in prayer who are being described as ‎עובר לפני התיבה‎, ‎are presumed to be at least on the same spiritual level as the ‎‎“ark,” so that they can inspire the Ark, i.e. words or letters, with ‎some of their holiness. Moses was an individual belonging to this ‎second group of tzaddikim, so much so, that after ‎descending from Mount Sinai with the second set of the Tablets, ‎his forehead exuded so much spiritual light that he had to ‎‎“screen” it as it frightened the people who saw in him a ‎supernatural phenomenon. We have explained repeatedly that ‎the level of his prophecy was such that he saw clear visions ‎whereas other prophets saw only unclear, murky visions. ‎‎(Yevamot 49) This enabled him to relate the words G’d had ‎spoken to him, verbatim, without having to paraphrase them.‎‎ Just as Yaakov lost his prophetic ability when he was about to ‎reveal details of the eventual redemption to his children on his ‎deathbed (Genesis 49,1-2) so Moses’ prophetic pre-eminence was ‎taken away from him shortly before his death, as most of this was ‎transferred to his successor Joshua. This is why his parting “song” ‎האזינו‎, is full of allusions, many of which are difficult to decipher. ‎Our verse above alludes to the process of the transition of Moses’ ‎spiritual powers to Joshua.‎

“And Yaakov called to his sons ….” (Bereshit, 49:1) It is written on this in the Midrash (Tanchuma, Vayechi, 8), “I shall call to the supernal E-lohim, to God who does all for me” (Tehilim, 57:3). Now that Yaakov Avinu wanted to bless his sons, he was unsure as to whether he needed to bless them after the anguish they caused him with the sale of Yosef, and, “any talmid chocham [Torah scholar] who is not vengeful and grudge-bearing like a serpent is not a talmid chocham” (Yoma, 22b). Therefore it says, “and he called,” which is an expression of crying out and longing of the heart, for he gave over his eyes and heart to the heights (to God) and let himself say whatever God put in his mouth. This is why the Midrash mentions this verse, as he asked God to complete the action for him. The word “blessing” is not used first (it does not say “he called his sons to bless them”) as it was still not yet clear to him what he was going to say. However, with Moshe Rabeynu, he began immediately by saying “this is the blessing,” since it was immediately clear to him what he was going to say when he began to speak. With Yaakov, it only says “he blessed them” after he finished speaking (in verse 28), for only after he finished speaking, and not before, was it clear to him that all his blessings were from God. At first, God placed words of rebuke in his mouth, to chide the first three tribes, for “a talmid chocham must be vengeful and grudge-bearing.” Then when he arrived at the tribe of Yehuda, God showed him from Heaven that he needed to be forgiving, for in the letters of “Yehuda” are the four letters of God’s blessed name, YHVH. These four letters in his name hint at the verse (Yesahya, 66:2), “I will look to this one, to the poor and contrite of spirit, and he will tremble at my word.” This means that there was nothing from Yehuda’s own initiative (he was an instrument of God), as it says (Zohar, Bereshit, 244b), “the dalet gathers up.” (Meaning that the dalet in Yehuda’s name [signifying Malchut, reception] would gather up whatever God’s name would give him.) Therefore there was no room to bear any anger against him, so when Yaakov began to bless Yehuda with the attribute of compassion, this attribute took over with the rest of the tribes and they were all included in his blessing.

Before Yaakov’s death, he gathered his children and said, “Gather together… and I will tell you what will happen at the end of days” (Bereishis 49:1). Our sages explain that Yaakov was preparing them for the upcoming exiles and wanted to reveal the end of days. The 12 tribes are the pillars on which Bnei Yisrael relies during exile, while the three forefathers (Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov) are above this “world of separation.” The tribes, however, continue until the end of days. Yaakov’s command to “Gather together and unite” implies they exist in this world of separation, similar to Haman’s criticism that Bnei Yisrael are “separated and spread out among the nations” (Esther 3:8). This separation is about revealing Hashem’s oneness in a world that appears divided. The Midrash explains that the four flags of the tribes correspond to uprooting the four exiles. The four rivers flowing from Gan Eden represent the four kingdoms of exile, not as wicked entities but as channels extending from Gan Eden to the world of separation. The 12 tribes are the borders for the nations, with the forefathers in Gan Eden forever and the tribes ascending and descending to uplift the lower realms. This is hinted at when Yaakov said “What will happen to you in the end of days,” indicating that the tribes will endure till the end of generations. It is with the merit of these tribes that we plead “In anger, remember the love,” referring to the love the tribes have for Hashem. This love is symbolized by the names of the tribes inscribed on Aharon’s breastplate as a remembrance before Hashem. The forefathers and the tribes are vessels prepared by Hashem to sustain the world's existence. Bnei Yisrael, following the path of the forefathers, must strengthen themselves in the merit of their roots, as stated in Tehillim 29:1, “Give praise to Hashem, the sons of the mighty.” The relationship between Hashem and Bnei Yisrael is both as a Father and a King. Through the Torah, Bnei Yisrael comprehend Hashem’s ownership of the world, reflecting the forefathers' understanding. The concept of Hashem’s Kingdom is to fight those who rebel against His rule, which will be fully revealed in the future. Bnei Yisrael are sent into a world of separation to testify to the Yoke of Heaven’s Kingdom. The 12 tribes and their flags symbolize fighting Hashem’s battles, with Bnei Yisrael ultimately repairing everything as both a “son” and a “servant,” embodying the missions of the forefathers and the tribes.

..*Gather together and I will tell you:* Rashi says he [Yaakov] wanted to reveal the date of Moshiach's coming, but the Shechina departed from him. To explain: when he focused and looked at every subsequent generation and saw what would happen to the Jewish people until the coming of Moshiach, he saw the length of the bitter Exile and the great darkness. He became greatly saddened and the Shechina departed from him as a result [of his sadness]. However, the Tribes [his sons] comforted him by saying Shema Yisroel, Hashem Elokeinu, Hashem Echad. Rashi comments on that verse, Hashem is now our G-d, but in the future [the Times to Come] He will be One and his Name will be One. [Thus, they were comforting Yaakov by pointing out that] he should be happy with the knowledge that in the Times to Come, after Moshiach's coming, Hashem will be One for the entire world [as the verse says] "on that day, He will be [One and His Name will be One]. [Yaakov accepted his sons' comfort] and [added his own prayer] "may the glory of the Name of His Kingdom be blessed forever and ever." That it may be speedily in our days, amen.

Then Yaakov called for his son's: He sought to reveal the appointed time for the end but it became concealed from him (Pesachim 56a.) Yaakov asks, "Perhaps there is sin (חטא) among you?" They said, "No, if you examine our names, you will not find the letters ח or ט in them. Then he said unto them, "Arise, there is also no ק or ץ letters (end) in them.

אשר יקרא אתכם, “what is going to happen to you;” here Yaakov intends to foretell the future; these were not meant to be blessings, as we do not find that he blessed Reuven, Shimon, and Levi. When the Torah writes in verse 28 of this chapter: וזאת אשר דבר להם אביהם, “and this is what their father had said to them,” (followed by “their father blessed them”) we have to understand that verse as follows: “this was what he foretold them.” The details of his blessing were not spelled out by the Torah.

באחרית הימים, seeing that Yaakov did not say: ימים, “years,” but הימים, “the years,” it is clear that he spoke of years that we have already heard about. He referred to the 400 years which G-d had already revealed to his grandfather Avraham as the period his descendants would be strangers, and part of this time even slaves, in a country not their own.

האספו ואגידה לכם, “gather around so that I can tell you, etc.;” in the next verse we read הקבצו ושמעו, “assemble and listen!” Here Yaakov is about to tell his sons that they will go into exile. On the other occasion he refers to the second exile. (B’reshit Rabbah 99,6)

את אשר יקרה אתכם, “what will befall you.” Yaakov referred to what would occur at the end of the 430 years when the people of Israel would be redeemed from slavery and exile. The wording used by Yaakov forces us to give this interpretation to his words. If this is not what he referred to, the Torah should not have added: באחרית היםים, “at the end of the years (that had been predicted),” but באחרית ימים בסוף העולם, “at the end of the history of the present world. I have heard an explanation that understands Yaakov as having alluded to the end of the first 5000 years of human history. (B’reshit Rabbah 98,2 and 99,5) Yaakov therefore was prevented by G–d from revealing whatever he had foreseen concerning that era. Yaakov could not understand why the vision was suddenly concealed from him, and he asked what his sons could be guilty of seeing that the letters ח and ט, both letters of the word חט(א) in the word “sin,” do not appear as part of the names of a single one of them. He was told by the Holy Spirit that at the same time none of the names of his sons contains the letters ק orצ , the letters forming the word קץ, end, (and צדיק, righteous) which are a prerequisite for such “end” being revealed to the bearer of such a name. The Holy Spirit added that as far as his having called upon his sons to gather around him was concerned, how come that he invited only them, but failed to include the Holy Spirit in his invitation? (Compare Isaiah, 43,22) ולא אותי קראת יעקב, “but you have not called upon Me, Yaakov?!” He was told that it was not part of his particular task, (virtue) to go revealing G–d’s secrets. (Proverbs 11,13) When Yaakov heard this, he changed course and began to address each son individually, i.e. ראובן בכורי אתה, “Reuven, you are my firstborn;”

THAT WHICH SHALL BEFALL YOU. Prophecies foretelling that which shall befall you in the future. Those who base themselves on Scripture’s closing remark, and this is that their father spoke unto them and blessed them (v. 28), and conclude that they (Jacob’s words) are blessings, err. (Since Scripture concludes with and this is that their father spoke unto them and blessed them (v. 28), it implies that what precedes are blessings.) For if it were so, where are the blessings of Reuben, Simeon and Levi? (These three sons were castigated, not blessed.) The way to understand and this is that their father spoke unto them and blessed them is as follows: and this (v. 3-27) is what their father spoke unto them by way of prophecy after which he blessed them. Scripture omits the blessings.

In the end of days. See Rashi. When the Divine Presence departed he was concerned that his sons were tainted with sin, but they pointed out that the root letters of the word cheit — “sin” — do not even appear in their names. He replied that neither do the letters comprising keitz — “the end [of days]”.

ויקרא יעקב אל בניו, “Yaakov called in his sons.” According to a Midrash, Yaakov commenced his blessing from the point where Yitzchak had concluded blessing his son as it is written: “Yitzchak called Yaakov and blessed him” (Genesis 28,1). Moses in turn commenced his blessing (Deut. 33,1) from the point where Yaakov had left off. David in turn, at the commencement of the Book of Psalms, began with the words with which Moses had left off, i.e. אשרי האיש, “happy the man who has not followed the counsel of the wicked.” Moses had concluded (Deut. 33,29) his blessings of the Jewish people with the words: “happy Israel, who can compare to you?” Referring to this David said in Psalms 119,100 “I have gained more understanding than my elders .”

באחרית הימים, “in the End of Days.” The time Yaakov referred to is the messianic age. It was quite appropriate that he should tell his sons matters dealing with the redemption from Egypt rather than matters dealing with the redemption in a distant future. How could he have preferred to concentrate on matters far distant instead of revealing some of what was relatively close at hand? We surmise that perhaps he had already given his sons allusions of the redemption from Egypt when he told them in 48,21 “and the Lord will be with you and He will bring you back to the land of your fathers.” After all, had it not been for the incident with the spies the redemption at the time of the Exodus would have resulted in Israel immediately taking possession of the land of Canaan. Seeing that he had alluded to the Exodus in the previous verse, it was quite normal that at this point Yaakov would want to reveal something about a final redemption. After all, both redemptions have this in common that the Jewish people would emerge from a very terrible exile. Besides, we have it on the authority of our prophets that the final redemption will parallel the redemption from Egypt in many respects. The principal difference will be that the final redemption will result in mankind acquiring a far greater knowledge of G’d and His attributes. When you examine Yaakov’s introduction you will note that he was going to concentrate on two assemblies i.e. he said האספו והקבצו, “assemble yourselves,” and in the next verse “gather yourselves.” The first expression האספו referred to the exiled people of the Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Yehudah respectively, just as mentioned in Isaiah 11,12 “and assemble the banished of Israel and gather the dispersed of Yehudah.” Isaiah 56,8 also speaks of G’d “gathering in the dispersed of Israel.” This indicates that there will be two redemptions after Isaiah’s time. It most likely refers to the redemption of the ten tribes in a separate redemption after the tribes of Yehudah and Binyamin have been redeemed first. The only time all of the tribes were redeemed simultaneously was at the Exodus from Egypt. The next time this will happen would be the final redemption. This is why the prophet (Isaiah 11,11) says “in that day My Lord will again apply His hand to acquire the other part of His people who have been left over.” Seeing that at the redemption from Babylon only 42.000 Israelites were redeemed the prophecy could not apply to that redemption. This is why the verse in Isaiah refers to a “second” redemption.

ויקרא, he called them in to assemble around him

את אשר יקרא אתכם, a reference to future events, מקרה, events that are not the direct outcome of man’s initiatives. The word occurs in this spelling (with the letter א instead of ה at the end) in Jeremiah 13,22 מדוע קראני אלה?, “Why did these things happen to me?” Or, in Isaiah 51,19 שתים המה קוראותיך, “these two things have befallen you.” There are many other examples of a similar nature in Scripture.

The meaning of the words את אשר is the same as כאשר, “when;” the word את frequently means the same as מן, “part of.” Yaakov, after all, did reveal only a very small fraction of what would happen to the tribes in the אחרית הימים, the period when the tribal heads had long died and their offspring had become part of the Jewish nation. Some of what he predicted was to occur relatively soon, other parts much later. When he used the words באחרית הימים he meant that what he spoke about would be as real as what would happen on the morrow. He referred specifically to the period when the Israelites would settle in the Holy Land, describing events that would take place then. Whatever he told them had been inspired by the spirit of prophecy. Parts of the prophecy concerned Israel when settled peacefully on its land, other parts spoke of events occurring during wars which would threaten the nation’s continued existence. He listed the names of his sons in the order of their birth up until Yehudah only.

IN THE END OF DAYS. These are the days of the Messiah, for Jacob alludes to him in his words, even as he said, Until Shiloh come, and his be the obedience of peoples. (Verse 10 here.) Now our Rabbis have said (Pesachim 56a.) that Jacob wished to reveal the end of Israel’s exile, but the Shechinah (the Divine Presence) departed from him. Thus in the opinion of all scholars, the end of days is a reference to the days of the Messiah.

(1) YA'AKOV CALLED. He sent for them.

(2) COME TOGETHER. For the seventy persons had increased during these 17 years and had become a numerous people, and according to the words of our Sages, to (six) hundred thousand.

(3) WHAT IS TO BEFALL YOU. With respect to their power and their inheritance.

ואגידה לכם THAT I MAY TELL YOU — He wished to reveal to them the end of Israel’s exile but the Shechinah departed from him and he began to speak of other things (Genesis Rabbah 98:2).

(1-2) הקבצו — האספו sind keineswegs gleichbedeutend; es ergibt sich dies schon aus der Erwägung, daß האסף selbst von einem Individuum gesagt werden kann: עד האסף מרים. (Bamidbar 12, 15). אסף heißt: etwas aus dem Kreise, oder der Örtlichkeit, wo es eigentlich nicht hingehört, dorthin aufnehmen, wohin es gehört. Es liegt immer die Verwandtschaft mit עזב darin, ein Loslösen von allem andern, Un gehörigen. Daher הֵאָסְפו: Reißt euch von allem Fremdartigen los und findet euch alle in dem einen gemeinsamen Ziele beisammen! Lasst euch alle von dem einen Gemein samen umfangen, aufnehmen! Stellet euch alle auf einen Boden! הֵאָ הֵאָסְפו fordert daher die geistige Sammlung auf einen einzigen Punkt, für ein einziges Ziel, wie die Weisen darum treffend erläutern: הטהרו! Wörtlich hieße es: Lasset euch aufnehmen (d. h. von eurer gemeinsamen Bestimmung).

קבץ hingegen — (verwandt mit קפץ schließen, כוץ zusammenschrumpfen, כבש zu sammenpressen, bezwingen, selbst יבש trocken, das Feste, im Gegensatz zum Zerfließenden, גביש, ein Edelstein, vielleicht der Diamant, seiner Festigkeit und Härte willen), — bezeichnet immer ein räumliches, äußeres Zusammenfinden mehrerer.

Wir haben somit hier zwei Aussprüche: Gebet euch zusammen eurem einen Ziele hin, so möchte ich euch vergegenwärtigen, was euch am Ende der Tage treffen wird. Eigentlich was euch a. E. d. T. rufen wird (siehe Kap. 24, 12). אחרית ist wohl von קץ zu unterscheiden. קץ ist das Ende, womit etwas aufhört, אחרית ist das, was nachher kommt, nachdem das andere geendet, somit hier: nachdem die jetzigen Zeitentwicklungen abgelaufen, also: die Hinterlassenschaft der Tage, das Ziel der Völkergeschichte.

Wir wissen aus dem Verfolg, daß Jakob in diesem Augenblick seine Söhne nicht in ihrer Übereinstimmung, sondern in ihren charakteristischen Verschiedenheiten im Geiste erblickte. Deshalb: "So verschieden ihr auch seid, gebt euch in eurer Verschiedenheit ganz dem einen Geiste hin, so will ich euch enthüllen, was euch am Ziele der Tage werden wird". Erst muss ein Sinn alle Söhne der Jakobsfamilie durchdringen, ehe das אחרית הימים kommt. Es kommt nicht, so lange nicht das האספו sich verwirklicht hat, ja — vielleicht — wird es so lange nicht einmal begriffen, und darum folgen hier von dem אחרית הימים nur kurz andeutende Pinselstriche.

הקבצו ושמעו! diese beiden Worte des sterbenden Vaters tragen die ganze jüdische Geschichte bis zum אחרית הימים. Materiell seid ihr בני יעקב, eine machtlose Minorität. Weil ihr aber eine so machtlose Minderheit seid, הקבצו, haltet zusammen, wachset ineinander, lasset euch nicht zerfällen, im קבוץ, in der Eintracht liegt eure Stärke; — und שמעו בני יעקב: nur durch eins kann die materiell schwächste Minderzahl der stärksten Majorität den Sieg abgewinnen, es ist der Geist, es ist שמעו, es ist die Hingebung an Geistiges, darum: שמעו בני יעקב! habet ein Ohr, habet Sinn fürs Geistige, "durstet" nach Geistigem, wie das Wort in seiner Tiefe heißt (שמע ist das geistige צמא), schöpfet, trinket gerne Geist! Dies ist das Testament unseres Vaters Jakob. "Eintracht und Geist" darin erkennt er Stärke und Leben seiner Kinder, und "wenn der Durst nach Geist in euch wach wird, so habet keinen anderen Durst als nach den Überlieferungen eures Vaters Jisrael, ושמעו אל ישראל אביכם!" Der Trunk aus dem jüdischen Born des Geistes und einträchtiges Zusammenhalten, dahin lautet das älteste Vermächtnis unseres sterbenden Vaters und das ruft uns noch das späteste Prophetenwort zu: והאמת והשלום אהבו (Secharja 8, 19). 
Raw Hirsch on Genesis 49: 3. הקבצו ,האספו, waren die ersten Gedanken, die Jakob beim Anblick seiner Söhne um sein Sterbelager erfüllten. Das Aneinanderhalten und das wache Interesse für alles Geistige war zunächst das Vermächtnis für alle. Soll aber eine solche, aus so verschiedenen Elementen bestehende Gesamtheit eine innere und äußere Einheit bilden, so bedarf sie einer Leitung; diese leitende Spitze sucht Jakob und mustert dazu seine Söhne. Am natürlichsten wäre diese Stellung dem Erstgeborenen zugekommen. Daher wendet er sich zuerst an Reuben.

כח .כחי, iKraft, verwandt mit כה: so, und dies verwandt mit כהה: dunkel werden. כה ist jene dunkle Quelle eines werdenden Wesens, die wir in uns und überall nur in ihren Produkten erkennen, die aber an sich uns stets dunkel bleibt, wir nennen sie Kraft; כה: so, ist Bezeichnung des Bildes, des Entwurfes, wonach sich etwas gestalten soll.

און verwandt mit הון, die Fähigkeit, etwas zu erwerben und zu besitzen. (Siehe oben Kap. 35, 18.) Jakob spricht: du bist כחי, entweder: du bist derjenige, in dessen Bildung und geistiger Erziehung und Pflege sich zuerst meine Kraft gezeigt; oder: in dir ruht meine Kraft, durch dich wirke mein Geist still weiter. Mit der gelungenen oder misslungenen Erziehung des ältesten Sohnes und der ältesten Tochter ist fast das ganze Werk der Erziehung, und hätte jemand die zahlreichste Familie, gewonnen oder verloren.

ראשית אוני: bist mein erster Besitz; vergl. oben אשר לקחתי מיד האמרי וגו, Jakobs erste Errungenschaft war Reuben.

יתר: was weiter reicht als ein anderes; in der Zeit: übrig bleiben; im Raume: die über ihren natürlichen Umfang hinaus gespannte Sehne. Daher יֶתֶר entweder Substantiv: Vorzug an Würde und Vorzug an Macht, wobei man dann aber supplieren müsste: dir gebührte. Wahrscheinlicher aber ist es Adjektiv, und zwar stat. const. von יָתֵר wie יֶרֶך von יָרֵך. כֶתֶף von כָתֵף: bevorzugt an Würde etc. שאת, wahrscheinlich hier: Hoheit, Würde, wie שאתו תבעת אתכם (Job 13, 11) משאתו יעצו להדיח (Psalm 62, 5), umsomehr, da die jüdische Würde נָשִיא heißt (siehe zu Kap. 25, 16): du bist בכור, und als solcher bevorzugt an Würde, und darum auch bevorzugt an Macht. Als Erstgeborener hast du die Bestimmung, נשיא deiner Brüder zu sein, Oberhaupt und Leiter deiner Familie, und darum auch einen größeren Anteil an materieller Macht zu erhalten, damit der geistigen Führerschaft die materielle Grundlage nicht fehle. Möglich auch, daß es geradezu: tragen hieße, du solltest am meisten zu tragen haben (im Gegensatz zu Esaus אלופים sind אלופינו מסובלים, die Belasteten), und darum auch einen größeren Anteil an Macht.

באחרית הימים, at the end of the period allocated to life on earth as we know it. Yaakov speaks of the arrival of the Messiah which will signify the end of the existence of the nations that oppose G’d and the Kingdom of G’d on earth. At that time the measure of sin that these nations accumulate will be full to overflowing, so that G’d will feel at liberty to bring about the appropriate retribution. [the concept is as old as Avraham, to whom G’d explained that realisation of his offspring disinheriting the Canaanites will have to await the time when the measure of sin of these people will be full. (Genesis 15,16). Ed.] Our author, drawing on various prophecies of the Books of Prophets to support his interpretation of באחרית הימים, “the end of days,” quotes Jeremiah 46,28: “for I will make an end to all the nations among which I have banished you; but I will not make an end of you!” He also quotes Bileam’s prophecy in Numbers 24,14 detailed in verse 17, in which he prophesies the doom befalling all the nations pre-eminent in his time and describes Israel as triumphant at that time. He adds that his prophecy is not one the fulfillment of which is imminent, but that much time will elapse before it will be realised. Similar prophecies are not only found in Michah 4,1 but even in our chapter when blessing Yehudah in verse 10, Yaakov speaks of the time frame he has in mind as the one when Shiloh will arrive, the one to whom nations will pay homage.

He wished to reveal the End... [How does Rashi know this? The answer is:] Since Scripture uses two expressions, “gather around” and “come together,” it hints to the End. For it is written (Yeshayah 66:12), “He will gather the scattered ones of Yehudah.” And it is written (Tzephaniah 3:19), “He will gather the lost one,” which hints to the last exile. Anoher answer: Since it is written, “In latter days,” which is superfluous, [perforce] it hints to the End of Days which will be in latter days.

Jacob called to his sons, and he said: Gather and I will tell you that which shall befall you at the end of days.

אשר יקרא אתכם באחרית הימים, “what will happen to you in the latter days.” At this point Yaakov wanted to reveal to his sons details about the ultimate redemption of the Jewish people, but this vision was withheld from him by G’d, so that he had to make do with allusions to earlier events, although he managed to insert hints of what was to happen still later. The words עד כי יבא שילה, are proof of this.

The Gemara limits its discussion to the problems posed by the oath sworn by R. Yoḥanan not to reveal the information. But, putting aside the strictures imposed by the oath, it is manifestly clear that the woman in question imparted the requisite pharmacological information to R. Yoḥanan in confidence and that she expressly informed him of her desire that this esoteric information remain her secret. The information, to be sure, was not personal and certainly was not pejorative. It was, however, information within the exclusive possession of the woman—not unlike the information conveyed to Moses by God that would perforce have remained a divine secret if not for God's express permission to transmit the information to the people of Israel. The sole but crucial distinction is that the medical information in question was of direct and tangible benefit to R. Yoḥanan's audience and its divulgence did no harm to the woman who entrusted the information to R. Yoḥanan. On the basis of the narrative as it is reported there is every reason to assume that the woman in question did not charge a fee for her medical ministrations and hence suffered no adverse financial effect. (See, R. Yitzchak Glick, Ḥinnukh Bet Yiẓḥak (Brooklyn, 5759), no. 34, who cites a narrative recorded in the Gemara, Shabbat 133b, in declaring that a professional secret may not be divulged even if failure to do so will cause a loss of income to the physician.) Indeed, Leḥem Setarim, one of the classic commentaries on Avodah Zarah, resolves another difficulty unrelated to this discussion with the observation that no compensation was involved because "since [the woman] was a courtesan she had no need to accept a fee and moreover if [her services were rendered in return] for a fee how is it that she did not wish to disclose what [R. Yoḥanan] must do on Shabbat until he swore?" (Cf. R. Yitzchak Zilberstein, Ẓohar, vol. IV (Jerusalem, 5759), ed. R. Eliyakim Dworkes, pp. 190-92, who discusses only the issue of interference with earning a livelihood and, in distinguishing between competition with a gentile and competition with a fellow Jew, notes that the courtesan was a non-Jewess.) Presumably, her motive in refusing to share the information with toothache sufferers was a desire for power or self-aggrandizement, or sheer pettiness. It would seem that this talmudic narrative serves to establish that the proprietary interest with regard to non-personal confidences established by the prohibition of bal tomar need not be respected by a confidant when it is exercised as a "trait of Sodom." (This thesis also serves to resolve a puzzling aspect of the midrashic explanation of Jacob’s statement recorded in Genesis 49:1. On his deathbed, Jacob addresses his sons saying: “Gather yourselves together that I may tell you that which should befall you in the end of days.” Jacob then proceeds to tell them nothing of the sort; he criticizes some and blesses others but does not at all engage in prognostication. Rashi, basing himself on a midrashic comment, explains that Jacob did indeed intended to reveal when the redemption would occur but God, not wishing that information to be revealed prematurely, caused the Shekhinah to depart from Jacob with the result that he was no longer in possession of that information. The Sages of the Midrash resolved the problem of textual interpretation but they have left us with an even graver problem. Whatever information Jacob possessed by virtue of the resting of the Shekhinah upon him was in the nature of a divine communication. If God desired His communication to Jacob of the date of the Redemption to be privileged, by what right did Jacob attempt to reveal it to his children? The prohibition of bal tomar should apply to the prophecy received by Jacob no less so than to the prophecy received by Moses. If, however, it is understood that there are no proprietary rights or rights of confidentiality that can be asserted when such information is of potential benefit to other parties and its disclosure entails no loss to the holder of the privilege, the problem is readily resolved. Jacob believed the information to be of significant psychological and emotional benefit to his progeny and since, virtually by definition, there could be no “harm” to God in its disclosure, he felt fully justified in imparting that information to his sons.)

“The appointed time of salvation is concealed.” (This appears to be a reference to Rashi’s comment on Gen. 49:1: Jacob “wished to reveal the messianic end, but the divine presence was re-moved from him.” See also Rashi’s source, Genesis Raba 98:2.) “What is in the heart is not revealed to the mouth.” (Kohelet Raba 12:10.) Who can know God’s secrets and say precisely when the impurity of the land and the people will be lifted, when the spirit, hidden in its essence but revealed in its actions, will return once again in response to improvements in the outward situation that enable its reappearance in strength and purity upon the people and the land? When will the time of lovers come again, when the people and the land will reunite and mutual goodness and blessing will flow from their relationship—not like in the days of darkness? No one knows. So we raise our eyes to see the signs that are hidden in plain sight. In their vision of the messianic era, the sages said that “there is no messianic portent more obvious than this”: (Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 98a. See also Rashi ad loc. “When the Land of Israel generously gives of her fruits, then redemption is drawing near; there is no more obvious sign of the messianic end than this.” Rav Kook urges paying attention to the renewed flourishing of agriculture in the Land of Israel as a portent of impending redemption.) “But you, O mountains of Israel, shall yield your produce and bear your fruit for My people Israel, for their return is near. For I will care for you: I will turn to you, and you shall be tilled and sown. I will settle a large population on you, the whole house of Israel; the towns shall be resettled and the ruined sites rebuilt. I will multiply men and beasts upon you, and they shall increase and be fertile, and I will resettle you as you were formerly, and will make you more prosperous than you were at first. And you shall know that I am the Lord.” (Ezek. 36:8–11. This is the prooftext cited in Sanhedrin 98a (see n. 59 above).)

Some problems in the text: 1) Why does Jacob seem to commence with the blessing twice, once with the words "Gather so I may tell you what will befall you in the end of days" (Genesis 49,1) and again in the next verse "Assemble and hear sons of Jacob, listen to Israel your father?" 2) When Jacob exclaims regarding Shimon and Levi, "I will divide them in Jacob and disperse them in Israel," we do observe that the tribe of Levi was dispersed forthwith. We do not however, read anywhere about the dispersal of Shimon. Why is this? 3) The blessing of Yehudah becoming the hereditary carrier of the monarchy, seems limited to the arrival of "Shilo." Why? 4) Why are the names of the sons of Zilpah positioned between those of the sons of Bilhah in these blessings? 5) Issachar's blessing in verse 14 and 15 seems contradictory. "He saw that repose was good, so he inclined his shoulder to carry heavy burdens." Surely this sounds illogical! 6) The blessing for Dan seems puzzling; "Like a serpent...biting the horse's heel" on the one hand, and on the other "in Your salvation, O G-d, I trust?" 7) Who are the owners of arrows "who hated Joseph?" In what way were the blessings Joseph received more generous than the ones received by his father? 8) Why are so many details recited about the cave of Machpelah? 9) In Chapter 50,1, we hear about assipha and geviyah. The normal word for death, i.e. meetah is missing. Why? 10) Why does the Torah have to tell us that when the brothers went to Canaan to bury their father, they left their livestock in Egypt? Whoever has heard of livestock being part of a funeral procession? 11) Why do we need to be told that the Canaanites appreciated that Jacob's passing was a cause of national mourning in Egypt? 12) The word loo normally means "who would give that." When the brothers voice concern that, now that their father is dead, Joseph might display hostility towards them, the choice of this word in verse 15 seems quite misplaced. 13) Why do the brothers beg for forgiveness twice? 14) When Joseph says to them in an attempt to calm their fears, "Am I in place of G-d?" this suggests that only his fear of G-d prevented him from taking his revenge. This surely was not the best way to reassure his brothers? 15) Why do we need to know that Joseph's grandchildren, resp. great-grandchildren were born on his knees?

In my view, however, the homily here alludes to the following (Pesachim 56a): "R. Shimon b. Pazi expounded (Genesis 49:1): 'And Jacob called to his sons and said: "Gather together and I will tell you what will befall you in the end of days"' — Jacob desired to reveal the end of days, but the Shechinah departed from him, whereupon he said: "Can it be, G-d forbid, that there is impurity in my seed, as with Abraham, my father's father, from whom Ishmael issued, and as with Isaac, my father, from whom Esau issued?" At this, all of his children answered: "Hear O Israel, the L-rd our G-d, the L-rd is One." "Just as there is only one L-rd in your heart, so there is only one L-rd in ours." According to this homily, this verse, though it constitutes a positive commandment, had already been stated by the tribes. The L-rd had already been praised by it though it is set down in its place as a mitzvah decreed for all generations. This is the intent of "You made Me a distinct entity in this world."

The third homily mentioned there is stated as follows: "He further expounded (Koheleth 12:11): 'The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails well driven in, the people of the gatherings, given by one shepherd' — just as a goad directs an ox along its furrow to bring life to the world, in the same way words of Torah direct the hearts of those who study it from the paths of death to those of life." The intent here is that just as the goad guides the ox in the making of a straight furrow and keeps it from straying here and there, and the result of that straightness is life for the world, namely, grain and fruit, in the same way words of Torah guide men's hearts and make them wise. And not the type of wisdom which results in injury or in erroneous views, but which provides the true knowledge whereby a man may attain his goal. For there are types of wisdom which enlighten a man's heart but direct him from the ways of life to those of death, providing him with evil acumen, which can lead to his undoing. But the Torah does not leave those who study it with wrong views or base character traits. As Solomon, may peace be upon him, said (Proverbs 2:10-12): "When wisdom enters your heart and knowing is pleasant to your soul, knowledge will guard you; understanding will keep you, to save you from the way of evil, from the man who speaks perversity." The intent is that when one acquires wisdom and it enters his heart and is as pleasant to his soul as a precious vessel, he gains great benefit for himself. For the knowledge guards over him, the understanding keeps him and saves him from the way of evil, and the man who speaks perversity will not ensnare him in his net.

The explanation of this verse is that the aspect called “If only-Lu-לו” (This refers to the six upper emotive qualities, each of which possess six, totaling thirty-six, which is the numerical value of “If only-Lu-לו-36.”) should be drawn forth to the quality of “This-Zot-זאת,” from the source of wisdom-Chochmah, which is called “good intellect-Sechel Tov-שכל טוב,” (See Psalms 111:10 – “The beginning of wisdom is fear of HaShem-יהו״ה, good intellect (Sechel Tov-שכל טוב) to all their practitioners.”) by means of the righteous-Tzaddik who is the foundation of the world. (This is a reference to the quality of foundation-Yesod, which is the quality through which beneficence is bestowed, and is the subject of the next gate, although he is beginning to introduce some of the terms relating to this quality insofar as it relates to the quality of kingship-Malchut.) They then will find “good intellect-Sechel Tov-שכל טוב” and eat of the fruit of the righteous-Tzaddik who is called good-Tov-טוב, as it states, (Isaiah 3:10) “Say of the righteous-Tzaddik-צדיק that he is good-Tov-טוב; for they shall eat the fruits of their deeds.” The continuation of the verse, “they would understand it from their end,” means that they should draw forth from the “width of the river-Rechovot HaNahar-רחובות הנהר,” (Genesis 36:37; This is one of the terms that relates to the quality of understanding-Binah, which is compared to the expanse of a river.) from the source of understanding-Binah, to this quality of this-Zot-זאת, which is called “The End of Days-Acharit HaYamim-אחרית הימים,” as it states, (Genesis 49:1) “Gather together and I shall tell you what will befall you in the End of Days-Acharit HaYamim-אחרית הימים.” Similarly, the verse states, (Jeremiah 31:16) “There is hope for your end-Acharitecha-אחריתך – the word of HaShem-יהו״ה.”

[2] Another explanation: "I will make my opinions widely known." This is Jacob, when he went down to Egypt, he declared the power of the Almighty, as it is written "And he blessed Joseph and said, 'The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God who has been my shepherd all my life to this day'" (Genesis 48:15). He said to them, "May it be the will [of God] that you go in the ways of Abraham and Isaac." They gathered and listened (Genesis 49:1). And why did he call them? Rather he said, "Abraham, my grandfather, had two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. Ishmael was wicked, Isaac was righteous. Similarly, Isaac had two sons, Esau and I. Esau despised the ways of God, and I loved His ways. And God gave me twelve sons. You may say that half of them are righteous and half are wicked." They said to him, "We know what is in your heart." He immediately prostrated himself, as it is written "And Israel bowed in worship" (Genesis 47:31), and began saying "Blessed be the Name of His glorious kingdom forever and ever." Rabbi Chanina said, "Why did he prostrate himself? So that no impure matter should leave his body. At that moment, it was fulfilled 'God has made Himself known in Judah, His name is great in Israel;'" (Psalm 76:2).

Chapter (81) 82: Torah [1] "And Jacob called unto his sons" (Genesis 49:1). The scriptures say: "For Sheol will not praise you (Isaiah 38:18), it was not for you to say 'let Esau be called to his sons,' as he was the firstborn, and why did he not perform the duty of honoring (i.e. burying) his father Isaac, but rather Jacob did it? It is because in the custom of the world, a murderer does not perform the duty of honoring, for he does not know when he will die, and who performs the duty of honoring for the fathers who died in their beds. Thus, Esau was not allowed to perform the duty of honoring, as he was a murderer, as it is said 'Now, therefore, let me get some game and make me savory food, that you may eat, and bless me' (Genesis 27:31), and 'For my soul is weary of murderers' (Jeremiah 4:31), and tired only means killing, as it is said 'Woe is me! For my soul is weary of murderers' (Jeremiah 4:31). Therefore, he did not call his sons, as it is said 'They do not know nor do they understand; they walk in darkness' (Psalms 82:5). Therefore, 'For Sheol will not praise you' (Isaiah 38:18), but a father will inform his sons, and he will call Jacob."

[2] Alternative interpretation: "Hear me, O Jacob" (Isaiah 43:22). In scriptures it is said like this: "And you did not call upon me, Jacob" (Isaiah 43:22). This is compared to a king who had a beloved poor man and made a feast for him. The king called his own sons and stood in the middle of the house, saying to the poor man, "You called all your children, but you did not call me. I do not love you." The poor man begged the king, saying, "I am poor and did not act according to your honor. I would be ashamed to call you." The king replied, "You should not be ashamed. You are more precious to me than what I have in my palaces." Similarly, when our father Jacob came to pass from this world, he called his sons and said his farewell and blessings. He sent them out throughout the land, and immediately the Lord was revealed to him. Jacob said to God, "You did not call upon me, and I did not call upon you, Jacob." God replied, "Do you not know that if a poor person calls upon me, I hear him? As it says, 'This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him' (Psalm 34:7). You should have called upon me with your children." Jacob said, "I was ashamed." God responded, "May you not be ashamed, as it is written, 'But now thus says the Lord, who created you, O Jacob, and he who formed you, O Israel: "Fear not, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by your name; you are mine"'" (Isaiah 43:1). When Jacob's sons saw him, they began to praise the Lord and His compassion towards them. As it is written, "When he saw his sons, he recited, and said" (Genesis 49:1), and thereafter, "Listen to me, O Jacob" (Isaiah 48:12).

“Of their patrilineal houses” – it would have been necessary to say only: “Each at his banner, with the insignias, the children of Israel shall encamp.” Why does the verse [also] state: “Of their patrilineal houses”? That is what is written: “I will project my knowledge far and wide, and I will ascribe righteousness to my Maker” (Job 36:3). When the Holy One blessed be He said to Moses: ‘Arrange them according to banners as they desired,’ Moses began agonizing. He said: ‘Now dispute is destined to be introduced between the tribes. If I say to the tribe of Judah that it should encamp in the east, and it says: I want only in the south, and likewise Reuben, and likewise Ephraim, and likewise each and every tribe, what do I do?’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘Moses, why do you care? They do not need you. They recognize their abode by themselves. It is, rather, that they have a will in their possession from Jacob their ancestor, how to encamp according to the banners, I am not introducing anything new for them. They already have a protocol from Jacob their ancestor; just as they carried him and surrounded his bier, so they will surround the Tabernacle.’ As Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: When Jacob our patriarch came to take leave of the world, he summoned his sons, as it is written: “Jacob summoned his sons” (Genesis 49:1). He blessed them and commanded them regarding the ways of God and they accepted the kingdom of Heaven upon them. When he completed his words, he said to them: ‘When you take me, accompany me with awe and honor. No other person shall touch my bier, not one of the Egyptians, and not one of your children, because you took wives from the women of Canaan.’ As it says: “His sons did to him as he had commanded them” (Genesis 50:12); his sons, but not the sons of his sons. “His sons carried him” (Genesis 50:13); how did he command them? He said to them: ‘My children Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, shall bear my bier from the east; Reuben, Simeon, and Gad will bear my bier from the south; Ephraim, Manasseh, and Binyamin will bear [my bier] from the west; Dan, Asher, and Naphtali will bear [my bier] from the north. Joseph will not bear, as he is the king and you are obligated to accord him deference. Levi will not bear. Why? It is because he bears the Ark, and one who bears the Ark of the One who lives forever shall not bear the coffin of the dead. If you did so, and bore my bier as I commanded you, God is destined to encamp you according to banners.’ When he passed away, they bore him as he had commanded them, as it is stated: “His sons did to him as he had commanded them”(Genesis 50:12). That is: “I will project my knowledge far and wide, and I will ascribe righteousness to my Maker” (Job 36:3), as they had knowledge from Jacob as to how to encamp according to banners. “I will ascribe righteousness to my Maker,” this is the Holy One blessed be He, who performed beneficial actions for Israel. In order to grant them a beneficial action as reward for fulfilling their father’s command, he commanded them to encamp according to banners only in accordance with their father’s command. Righteousness is with them as he changed nothing, so as not to introduce dispute between them. That is why it is stated: “Of their patrilineal houses” – just as they surrounded their father’s bier, so they shall encamp. That is, “of their patrilineal houses, the children of Israel shall encamp.”

Variant reading: “This is what their father Jacob spoke to them” (Genesis 49:28) is not written here, but rather, “their father.” Another man like me is destined to bless you and from the place that I concluded, he will begin, as it is stated: “This is what [their father] spoke.” When Moses stood, he began with “this,” as it is stated: “This is the blessing [that Moses, the man of God, blessed the children of Israel with before his death]” (Deuteronomy 33:1). [Jacob] said to them: ‘I will say these blessings to you. When will they take effect? When you receive the Torah,’ as it is stated: “This is the Torah” (Deuteronomy 4:44). That is, “this is what their father spoke to them.” With that which their father Jacob concluded [in blessing] them, Moses began [blessing] them. Moses said: “I gain insight from the elders, [for I uphold Your edicts]” (Psalms 119:100). Isaac, when he blessed Jacob, and said to him: “And God Almighty [will bless you]” (Genesis 28:3), with what did he conclude? “Isaac summoned Jacob” (Genesis 28:1). (This is called the conclusion because it was the beginning of Isaac’s concluding blessing to Jacob, after he had already blessed him in Genesis ch. 27. See also a variant reading in Devarim Rabba 11:1. ) Jacob began from where his father had concluded, as it is stated: “Jacob summoned his sons” (Genesis 49:1), and he concluded when he blessed them with “this” – “this is what [their father] spoke [to them]” (Genesis 49:28). Moses began from where Jacob had concluded: “This is the blessing” (Deuteronomy 33:1). With what did Moses conclude? “Happy are you Israel” (Deuteronomy 33:29). David, too, when he came to recite a psalm, began from where Moses had concluded: “Happy is the man” (Psalms 1:1). That is, “I gain insight from the elders.” “They came to the threshing floor of Atad, that is beyond the Jordan, and they lamented a very great and substantial lament there, and he observed mourning for his father seven days” (Genesis 50:10).

“I cry out to God on High” (Psalms 57:3). “I cry out to God on High” – on Rosh HaShana. “To the Almighty who completes for me” (Psalms 57:3) – on Yom Kippur, to determine which will be for God and which will go to an uninhabitable land. (As part of the Temple service on Yom Kippur, two goats were brought, and lots were drawn to determine which would be sacrificed as an offering to God and which would be brought to a barren land and pushed off a cliff, symbolically carrying off the people’s sins. If the lot that said “to God” would be drawn by the High Priest in his right hand, that was a sign that God was inclined to respond positively to the prayers of the people and to grant atonement (Matnot Kehuna). ) Another matter: “I cry out to God on High” (Psalms 57:3) – this is Jacob our patriarch. “To the Almighty who completes for me” (Psalms 57:3) – that the Holy One blessed be He agreed with him to give to each and every one as befitting him. (God agreed to implement the blessings Jacob gave to his sons. )

“Jacob called to his sons, and he said: Gather, and I will tell you what will befall you at the end of days. Assemble and hear, sons of Jacob, and listen to Israel your father” (Genesis 49:1–2). “Jacob called to his sons.” “The lot is cast in the bosom” (Proverbs 16:33) – this is the lottery of Yom Kippur. “And all of one’s judgment is from the Lord” (Proverbs 16:33) – to determine which will be for God and which will go to an uninhabitable land. Another matter: “The lot is cast in the bosom” – this is the lot of the tribes. (Their destiny as expressed in the blessings they received from Jacob. ) “And all of one’s judgment is from the Lord” – that the Holy One blessed be He agreed with him to give each and every one as befitting him. “Jacob called to his sons” – Rabbi Yudan and Rabbi Pinḥas: Rabbi Yudan said: Jacob called the Almighty to be with his sons. Rabbi Pinḥas said: He invited Him to his sons. (He invited Him [zimno] to share in his joy over the fact that all his sons had remained righteous (Matnot Kehuna). Alternatively, he asked God to be always available [mezuman] to come to his sons’ aid (Etz Yosef). ) Rabbi Avun said: He appointed Him steward for his sons. “He said: Gather ….” – gather from the land of Egypt and assemble in Rameses. Gather from the ten tribes and assemble to the tribe of Judah and Benjamin. He commanded them to act with deference to the tribe of Judah and Benjamin. Rabbi Aḥa said: Purify yourselves, just as it says: “They gathered themselves together…” (Nehemiah 12:28), “and they purified the chambers” (Nehemiah 13:9). The Rabbis say: He commanded them regarding dissension. He said to them: ‘You shall all be one assembly.’ That is what is written: “You, Son of man, take for you one piece of wood, and write on it: [For Judah] and for the children of Israel [his companions]” (Ezekiel 37:16) – it is written “his companion” (The term “his companions [ḥaverav]” is written without a vav, which would ordinarily be read “his companion [ḥavero],” even though in this instance it is traditionally pronounced in the plural, ḥaverav. ) – the children of Israel became a single group. Prepare yourselves for redemption. What is written thereafter? “I will render you one nation…” (see Ezekiel 37:22). “[I will tell you] what will befall you at the end of days” – Rabbi Simon said: He showed them the downfall of Gog, just as it says: “It will be at the end of days” (Ezekiel 38:16). Rabbi Yehuda said: He showed them the building of the Temple, just as it says: “It will be at the end of days that the mountain of the House of the Lord will be established” (Micah 4:1). The Rabbis said: He came to reveal the End, but it was concealed from him. Rabbi Yehuda in the name of Rabbi Elazar bar Avina: Two people, the End was revealed to them and was then concealed from them. They are Jacob and Daniel. Daniel – “But you, Daniel, obscure the matters and seal” (Daniel 12:4). Jacob – “what will befall you at the end of days.” “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my strength, and the first of my potency; greater honor and greater power” (Genesis 49:3). “Reuben, you are my firstborn” – this teaches that he came to reveal the End, but it was concealed from him. (He began with, “I will tell you what will befall you at the end of days,” and continued with, “Reuben you are my firstborn,” which does not pertain to the end of days. This shows that the events of the end of days were concealed from Jacob so that he would not reveal them. ) This is analogous to a king’s confidant who was passing from the world, and his sons were surrounding his bed. He said to them: ‘Come and I will reveal to you the secrets of the king.’ He lifted his eyes and gazed at the king. (He saw from the king’s expression that he did not want him to reveal the secrets. ) He said to them: ‘Be vigilant regarding the honor of the king.’ So, Jacob our patriarch lifted his eyes and saw the Divine Presence standing over him. He said to them: ‘Be vigilant regarding the honor of the Holy One blessed be He.’ The Rabbis said: So, the congregation of Koraḥ was sinking and descending, sinking and descending, until Hannah stood and prayed on their behalf: “The Lord puts to death and brings to life; He lowers to the netherworld and elevates” (I Samuel 2:6). (Just as the congregation of Koraḥ was ostracized until Hannah prayed on their behalf, so too, Reuben was ostracized until Moses restored him. Some commentaries write that this passage should not appear here, and belongs instead at the end of section 4 (see, e.g., Matnot Kehuna). )

“Jacob called to his sons, and he said: Gather, and I will tell you what will befall you at the end of days. Assemble and hear, sons of Jacob, and listen to Israel your father” (Genesis 49:1–2). Why did he call them? He sought to reveal to them the End. It is written: “He removes speech from the trusted, and takes the sense of elders” (Job 12:20). Who are the “trusted” and the “elders”? They are Isaac, Jacob, Aaron, and Moses. In Moses’s regard it is written: “In all My house he is trusted” (Numbers 12:7). Likewise, in Aaron’s regard: “The Torah of truth was in his mouth” (Malachi 2:6). But because they said: “Hear now, defiant ones” (Numbers 20:10), they were sentenced because of their speech – “therefore, you will not bring this assembly [into the land that I have given them]” (Numbers 20:12). That is, “He removes speech from the trusted.” (Here the midrash interprets the verse to mean: “He removes the trusted due to speech,” meaning that God removed Moses and Aaron from their projected positions of leading Israel into the land due to their sin involving speech. ) “And takes the sense of elders” – this is Isaac and Jacob. Isaac was fond of Esau, whom the Holy One blessed be He hated, and he said to him: “Prepare delicacies for me” (Genesis 27:4), and sought to bless him and reveal the End to him. What did the Holy One blessed be He do? He stripped him of his sense, and he did not know, (God removed the divine spirit from Isaac. ) but he began trembling, as it is stated: “Isaac was overcome [with very great trembling]” (Genesis 27:33). When he was unable to find what to say, he said: “Indeed he shall be blessed” (Genesis 27:33). Jacob, too, sought to reveal the End to his sons, as it is stated: “Gather, and I will tell you what will befall [you at the end of days]”; and the Holy One blessed be He concealed it from him, and he began saying: “Reuben, you are my firstborn” (Genesis 49:3). That is, “and takes the sense of elders.”

“Gather, and I will tell you” – he appointed them as elders, just as it is stated: “Gather to Me seventy men of the elders of Israel” (Numbers 11:16). “Gather” is stated, and “assemble and hear” is stated – he informed them that they would be exiled twice. “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my strength, and the first of my potency; greater honor and greater power. Impetuous as water, you shall not excel [totar]; because you mounted your father’s bed; then you desecrated, he who ascended my couch” (Genesis 49:3–4). “Reuben, you are my firstborn” – you are my firstborn, you are similar to me. I lived eighty years and did not see even one drop of semen. “My strength and the first of my potency” – you were my first drop. “Greater honor and greater power” – three crowns were in your possession: priesthood, kingship, and the birthright. Priesthood, as it is written: “Greater honor [se’et],” and se’et is nothing other than priesthood, as it is written: “Aaron lifted [vayisa] his hands” (Leviticus 9:22). Kingship, as it is written: “And greater power,” and power is nothing other than kingship, as it is written: “He will give strength to His king” (I Samuel 2:10). The birthright, as it is written: “Reuben, you are my firstborn.” And you lost them. What caused you [to lose them]? “Impetuous [paḥaz] as water, you shall not excel.” For what is it an acronym? Rabbi Eliezer says: You were impetuous [paḥazta], you cast [hishlakhta] (Although hishlakhta begins with a heh whereas paḥazta has a ḥet, since these sounds are produced in a similar way and sound similar, they are considered interchangeable for homiletical purposes (Etz Yosef; see Rabbi David Luria). ) the yoke from upon your neck, your evil inclination moved [za] against you. Rabbi Yehoshua says: You were impetuous [paḥazta], you sinned [ḥatata], you engaged in licentiousness [zanita]. Rabbi Levi said: Transpose paḥaz – you trembled [zata], you became anxious [ḥaradta], and the sin departed [paraḥ] from you. (He did not actually engage in relations with Bilha, and he repented even for the thought of doing so.) Alternatively, paḥaz – you trampled [pasata] the law, you profaned [ḥilalta] your birthright, you became a stranger [zar]. (The term stranger is used as a contrast to priesthood; a non-priest is known as a stranger [zar]. ) “As water” – what is “as water”? If a person pours a flask of water and it spills, nothing at all remains [mishtayer] in it, but if it was of oil or of honey, something would remain in it. That is why it says: “As water you shall not totar. “Because you mounted [alita] your father’s bed” – when you brought mandrakes and your mother was saying to her sister: “Was the taking of my husband insignificant” (Genesis 30:15), you caused my bed to be elevated [alita] and my couch to be desecrated. (This view interprets the term “mounted [alita]” to mean elevated, in a positive sense. When Reuben brought mandrakes to his mother (Genesis 30:14), Rachel asked for some of them. Leah responded: “Was the taking of my husband insignificant that you would take also of my son’s mandrakes?” and Rachel responded: “Therefore he will lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes” (Genesis 30:15). In this exchange, Leah was considered to have respected and elevated Jacob’s bed and Rachel was considered to have denigrated it (Etz Yosef; see Bereshit Rabba 98:4). ) Because you caused it to be desecrated, you will be a pariah until Moses, in whose regard it is written: “Moses ascended” (Exodus 19:3), will come and release you and draw you near. That is what is written: “May Reuben live” (Deuteronomy 33:6). (This was stated by Moses. )

“This is the blessing that Moses, the man of God, blessed the children of Israel before his death” (Deuteronomy 33:1). Halakha: A person of Israel who passed before the ark (He served as prayer leader.) and erred, (He is unable to continue the prayer for some reason.) how must he act? So the Sages taught: One who passes before the ark and errs, let another pass in his stead. Our Rabbis taught us, Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: If one erred in the first three blessings, he returns to the beginning of “Shield.” (“Shield of Abraham,” the first blessing of the Amida prayer.) Rav Huna said: If one erred in the middle three (There are actually thirteen middle blessings in the weekday Amida prayer. Thus, the midrash is referring to a case in which someone made a mistake in one of the thirteen middle blessings. In the Musaf prayer of Rosh Hashanah there are three middle blessings.) blessings, he returns to “the holy God.” (The third blessing ends with the words "the holy God." The midrash states that the person who made the mistake starts from the fourth blessing, which begins right after the words "the holy God.") Rav said: If one erred in the final three, he returns to the beginning of “we give thanks.” (Which is the first of the last three blessing) Another matter, one who passes before the ark and erred, another passes in his place. From where does he begin? It is from the beginning of the blessing where he erred. From where did they derive it? It is from the patriarchs of the world. Why? It is because each of them would begin only from where the other ended. How so? Abraham blessed Isaac. From where is it derived? It is as it is written: “Abraham gave all that was his to Isaac” (Genesis 25:5). What did he give him? Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya, Rabbi Yehuda says: He gave him the birthright, like the matter that is stated: “He sold his birthright to Jacob” (Genesis 25:33). Rabbi Neḥemya said: He gave him a blessing, like the matter that is stated: “May God give you [of the dew of the heavens and the fat of the earth…]” (Genesis 27:28). Isaac arose to bless Jacob, he said: ‘From the place that father ended, I will begin. Father ended with veyiten, I, too, will begin with veyiten,’ as is it is stated: “May God give you [veyiten lekha].” With what did Isaac end? It was with summoning, as it is stated: “Isaac summoned Jacob and blessed him” (Genesis 28:1). Jacob arose to bless the tribes, he said: ‘I will begin only with summoning,’ as it is stated: “Jacob summoned his sons” (Genesis 49:1). With what did he end? It was with zot, as it is stated: “And this [vezot] is what their father spoke to them” (Genesis 49:28). Moses arose to bless Israel, he said: ‘I will begin only with zot.’ From where is it derived? It is from what is written regarding the matter: “This is [vezot] the blessing.”

(Jos. 10, 13) And the sun stood still .........written in the book of Yashar. What is the book of Yashar? Said R. Chiya b. Aba in the name of R. Jochanan: "This refers to (Genesis) the book in which the birth of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who are named Jesharim (the upright), as it is said (Num. 23, 10) Let me die the death of the righteous Jesharim, etc. And where is it hinted [that such a miracle will occur with Joshua]? From (Gen. 48, 19) And his seed shall become a multitude of nations, i.e., when shall his seed become a multitude of nations? At the time when Joshua stopped the sun. (Jos. 10, 13) And the sun stood still in the midst of the heavens, and hastened not to go down about a whole day. How many hours? Said R. Joshua b. Levi: "Twenty-four hours; it went six [hours] and stopped six, went six, and stopped six, the entire episode lasting a whole day." R. Elazar said: "Thirty-six hours, it went six [hours] and stopped twelve, it went six, and stopped twelve; its stopping time was equal to a whole day [24 hours]." R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "Forty-eight, it went six and stopped twelve, went six and stopped twenty-four, for it is said, And it hastened not to go down about a whole day." According to the above, they differ in the additional hours of that day.We are taught in a Baraitha: Just as the sun stopped for Joshua, so also did it stop for Moses. An objection was raised from (Ib. ib. 14) And there was no day like that before it or after it. If you wish, in the time of Moses it stopped for fewer hours, or if you wish, it may be said that in Moses' time there were no hailstones mentioned, as the passage says (Ib. ib. 11) And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, etc., that the Lord cast down great stones, and said: To teach the sons of Judah the bow, Behold it is written in the book of Yashar. What does Yashar mean? Said R. Chiya b. Aba in the name of R. Jochanan: "This refers to Genesis [as said above]. And where is it hinted [that Judah will be fighters]? It is written (Gen. 49, 8) Thy hand shall be on the neck of thy enemies. Which is the weapon that needs the hand against the neck? It is the how," R. Elazar, however, maintains that the book of Yashar refers to Deuteronomy. And why is it named Yashar? Because there is a passage (6, 18) And thou shalt do that which is right (Yashar) and good in the eyes of the Lord. And where is the intimation of this? (33, 7) Let the power of his hands. And which is the weapon for which both hands are needed? It is the bow." R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "It refers to the book of Judges. And why is it called Yashar? Because therein is written (17, 6) Every man did what seemed right (Yashar) in his eyes. And where is it intimated [in the Biblical text]? (3, 2) To teach them war. And what is the weapon for which teaching is necessary? This is the bow. And whence do we know that this refers to Judah? The passage reads (Ib. 1, 1) Who shall go up for us first against them? And the Lord said: 'Judah shall go up.' "

Our Rabbis were taught: How did the people of Jericho recite the Sh'm'a? They recited, Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one God (Deu. 6, 4) but did not pause (at the end of the verse). This is the opinion of R. Meier. R. Juda says: "They did pause [between the two verses], but they did not insert [between Sh'm'a (Hear, O Israel) and the next verse] the benediction. Blessed be His name, whose glorious kingdom is forever and ever." And why do we add this to the Sh'm'a? As R. Simon b. Lakish explained it, for R. Simon b. Lakish said: "It is written (Gen. 49, 1) And Jacob called unto his sons and said, etc.; i.e., Jacob wanted to disclose all that would happen to them in the latter days, but the Shechina departed from him and he began to fear, saying: 'Perhaps, God forbid, my children have a defect as was the case with my grandfather, Abraham, of whom Ishmael came forth, and like Isaac, my father, of whom Esau came forth.' Thereupon his children said to him. Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one God, i.e., 'Father, just as in thy heart there is but one God, so in our hearts, there is but one God.' Then Jacob, our father, uttered forth, Blessed be His name, whose glorious kingdom is forever and ever." So the Rabbis argued, what should be the form nowadays? To say the second verse, would make us at variance with Moses, our teacher, who did not say it; not to say it would be to disregard Jacob, who did say the verse. They therefore ordained that we say it as did Jacob, but inaudibly [out of respect to Moses]. R. Abahu said: "In Usha it was ordained that the above verse should be said in a loud voice in order that the Sadducees should not complain that we say a separate prayer; but in Nehardea, where there were no Sadducees, even unto this day the above verse is said inaudibly."

Jer. 3:19): AND GIVE YOU A DESIRABLE LAND, a land that the ancestors of the world (Literally: “fathers of the world.” According to Ber. 16b and Rashi, ad loc., the title father should be limited to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Similarly the title mother should apply only to Sarah, Rebekah, Leah, and Rachael.) found desirable. Abraham, of whom it is stated (in Gen. 12:9): THEN ABRAM JOURNEYED AS HE WENT ON AND TRAVELED TOWARDS THE NEGEB. And so it says (in Gen. 23:4): I AM AN ALIEN AND TRANSIENT AMONG YOU; GIVE ME A BURIAL PLACE AMONG YOU. Isaac. {He also found it desirable when he was departing from world. What did he say to his children (in Gen. 49:29)? BURY ME WITH MY ANCESTORS IN THE FIELD OF EPHRON BEN ZOHAR THE HITTITE.} (Note that Gen. 49:1, 28 attributes these words to Jacob.) [The Holy One also endeared it to Isaac (in Gen. 26:3): RESIDE IN THIS LAND, …. ] Jacob. This he commanded (in Gen. 50:5): IN MY GRAVE WHICH I DUG FOR MYSELF IN THE LAND OF …. Ergo (in Jer. 3:19): A DESIRABLE LAND, THE MOST BEAUTIFUL (rts: TsBH TsB') HERITAGE OF THE NATIONS, in that it is a land of delights (rt.: TsBH) for the peoples of the world.

Another interpretation (of Gen. 49:1): THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS. This text is related (to Ps. 57:3 [2]): I SHALL CALL TO GOD MOST HIGH, TO THE GOD WHO BRINGS THINGS TO COMPLETION FOR MY BENEFIT. R. Joshua ben Levi said: An earthly court has decreed three things when the Holy One has concurred with them. (Gen. R. 96, New Version, on Gen. 49:1 (= pp. 1202—1204 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); cf. yBer. 5:8 (or 9) (14c); Mak. 23b; Ruth R. 4:5; M. Pss. 57:2; cf. also Matthew 16:19.) They are the following:

Another interpretation: I SHALL CALL TO GOD MOST HIGH. < This > speaks about Jacob. (Gen. R. 98:1.) When his sons came for him to bless them, he began to distribute prokopai (The Greek word means “advancements.”) (i.e., gifts) to them. And where is it shown that the Holy One concurred with him? You find that in the case of all the blessings with which our father Jacob blessed the tribes, Moses blessed them with the same < blessings > because the Holy One concurred with him in the case of each and every blessing. Ergo (in Gen. 49:1): THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS. (Thus Jacob, and not God, took the initiative in blessing the tribes.)

[(Gen. 49:1:) THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS AND SAID: GATHER TOGETHER.] R. Pinhas bar Hama the Priest and R. Judah bar Shallum the Levite said: What is the meaning of GATHER TOGETHER (rt.: 'SP)? Be purified, even as you say (in Numb. 12:14 with reference to Miriam's uncleanness from leprosy): LET HER BE SHUT UP SEVEN DAYS OUTSIDE OF THE CAMP, AND THEN LET HER BE BROUGHT IN (rt.: 'SP). (Gen. R. 96, New Version, on Gen. 49:1 (= p. 1204 in the Theodor-Albeck edition; cf. Gen. R. 98:2).)

Another interpretation (of Gen. 49:1): GATHER TOGETHER (rt.: 'PR). Become individual study groups (rt.: 'PR). What did they do? When they entered, he began reproaching (Gk.: kentroun, i.e., “to strike with a goad.”) them. (For simply entering without forming study groups.)

(Gen. 49:28, cont.:) AND THIS IS WHAT THEIR FATHER SPOKE TO THEM WHEN HE BLESSED THEM. EACH ONE WITH HIS OWN BLESSING IS HOW HE BLESSED THEM. "Him" is not written here but HE BLESSED THEM. (Tanh., Gen. 12:17; Gen. R. 97, New Version, on 49:28 (= pp. 1227—1228 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); 99(100)4; Numb. R. 13:8; Cant. R. 4:7:1; cf. also Exod. R. 1:6, 16.) Why so? Because (in Gen. 49:8-22) he gave Judah the strength of a lion, Joseph the strength of an ox, (Shor. Although the Masoretic Text of Gen. 49:22, from which this allusion is taken, vocalizes this word as shur, i.e., “wall,” the present context requires that Joseph be likened to some animal.) Naphtali the lightness of a deer, and Dan the bite of a serpent. You might say that one is greater than another; < so > their commonality is < mentioned > at the end. EACH ONE WITH HIS OWN BLESSING … HE BLESSED THEM. Thus he distributed the land to them. He gave Judah the land which produces barley and Benjamin land which produces wheat. Even so, they had a commonality with each other in that they each would eat what belonged to the other. Ergo (in Gen. 49:28): AND THIS IS WHAT THEIR FATHER SPOKE TO THEM. "Unto them" is not written here but TO THEM. (Buber cites Samuel Jaffe ben Isaac Ashkenazi, Yefeh To’ar, a commentary on the Midrash Rabbah, Part I on Genesis (Venice, 1597—1606), who cites Rashi, on Gen. 24:7, and explains that “to them” (lahem) used with the verb “speak” (rt.: DBR), as opposed to its use with the verb “say” (rt.: ’MR), means that one is speaking “concerning them” rather than “with them,” which is what “unto them” (alehem) would have implied. So also Enoch Zundel ben Joseph in his commentary Ets Yosef, on Tanh., Gen. 12:16. For a suggested rendering, see the following note.) (Ibid.:) AND THIS < is how > someone like me is going to bless you, and at the place where I have stopped he is beginning. Thus it is stated (ibid.): AND THIS IS WHAT THEIR FATHER SPOKE TO THEM. (Apart from the words AND THIS (in the sense of ALSO THIS), there is another hint there that the verse has a wider meaning in that Jacob is simply alluded to as THEIR FATHER instead of by name. Like Jacob, Moses is a father of Israel.) When Moses arose, he opened (the blessing in Deut. 33:1) with AND THIS IS THE BLESSING < WITH WHICH MOSES, THE MAN OF GOD, BLESSED THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL BEFORE HE DIED >. < He began > from where Jacob had stopped. Ergo (in Gen. 49:28 also): AND THIS. He said these blessings for them. When did they come to pass for you? From the time that you received the Torah, about which it is written (in Deut. 4:44): AND THIS IS THE TORAH. Note the AND THIS. And also, with whatever < expression > Jacob had closed his blessing, Moses opened for them. Moses said (in Ps. 119:100): I HAVE GAINED UNDERSTANDING FROM THE ELDERS. When Isaac blessed Jacob, he said (in Gen. 28:3): MAY GOD ALMIGHTY BLESS YOU. With what did he finally close his blessing? With a calling (according to Gen. 28:1): SO ISAAC CALLED JACOB AND BLESSED HIM. So, in the case of Jacob, where his father had stopped, from there he had begun (according to Gen. 49:1): THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS. Then, Jacob stopped (in Gen. 49:28) with THIS; so Moses also, when he arose to bless the tribes, began with AND THIS (in Deut. 33:1): AND THIS IS THE BLESSING. And with what did Moses close? With BLESSED ARE YOU, as stated (in Deut. 33:29): BLESSED ARE YOU, O ISRAEL! WHO IS LIKE YOU? See < how > David opened (Ps. 1:1)! With BLESSED IS THE ONE. Ergo (in Ps. 119:100): I HAVE GAINED UNDERSTANDING FROM THE ELDERS.

(Gen. 47:28:) AND JACOB LIVED IN THE LAND OF EGYPT < SEVENTEEN YEARS >…. Why is this parashah more closed (Normally a new section (or parashah) has a space of nine letters, while a subsection begins after a space of three letters. This section begins after a space of one letter.) than all < other > parashiyyot? (Gen. R. 96:1.) Because, as soon as Jacob died, the servitude of Israel began. But another reason is that he desired to reveal the end of days, but it was closed off from him. (See below, 12:9; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 49:1.) And another reason is that he closed off all the troubles in the world from him.

(Gen. 49:1:) THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS. Should it not rather have said: "So Esau called his sons"? (Gen. R. 96, “New Version,” at the beginning on Gen. 49:1 (= pp. 1199–1200 in the Theodor-Albeck edition).) Why? Because he was older. The Scripture says (in Is. 38:18): FOR SHEOL SHALL NOT GIVE YOU THANKS; DEATH SHALL NOT PRAISE YOU. Who gives thanks? One who lives and bows down to the living God. It is so stated (in vs. 19): THE LIVING, < ONLY > THE LIVING SHALL GIVE YOU THANKS, EVEN AS I DO TODAY…. (Thus wicked people like Esau cannot praise God because they are regarded as dead even in this life while the righteous live even in death. So Ber. 18ab.) And so Esau the Wicked did not die upon his bed and made no diatheke (The word is Greek.) (i.e., will). Then who did make a diatheke? Jacob, as stated (in Gen. 49, which begins): THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS.

[(Gen. 49:1:) THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS.] This text is related (to Job 12:20): HE DEPRIVES THE TRUSTWORTHY OF SPEECH AND TAKES AWAY THE REASON OF ELDERS. (Tanh., Gen. 12:8; Gen. R. 96, New Version, on Gen. 49:1 (= pp. 1276—1277 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); also Gen. R. 99 (another version):5 (= pp. 1200—1202 in the Theodor-Albeck edition).) This refers to Isaac and Jacob, in that both of them wanted to reveal a mysterion (The Greek word means “secret thing” or “mystery.”) of the Holy One (i.e., his secret). Isaac called for Esau. He wanted to reveal the end to him, but the Holy One concealed it from him, as stated (in Gen. 27:1): HE CALLED FOR HIS ELDER SON, ESAU; < AND HE SAID UNTO HIM: MY SON; AND HE SAID: HERE AM I >…. (Since both patriarchs used the same verb (CALLED) when death was near, the midrash assumes that the purpose for the calling is the same here as in Gen. 49:1. Isaac, however, got no further in his revelation than MY SON.) Jacob also wanted to reveal the end to his sons, (See above, 12:1; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 49:1.) as stated (in Gen. 49:1): < THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS AND SAID >: GATHER TOGETHER AND LET ME TELL YOU < WHAT SHALL HAPPEN TO YOU IN THE LATTER DAYS >. To what is the matter comparable? To a slave whom the king trusted with everything that he had. (PR 21:13.) When that slave came to die, he called for his sons in order to make them free and tell them where their manumission document (Gk.: diatheke (“testament”).) was. The king stood over him. When he saw him standing < there >, he discarded the thing which he had wanted to reveal to them. He began saying to them: Will you slaves of the king please honor him in the same way that I have honored him all my life? Similarly (according Gen. 49:1), Jacob called for his sons to inform them when the end would be. Immediately the Holy One was revealed over him. He said to him: You called for your sons but did not call for me. < It is so stated > (in Is. 43:22): BUT YOU HAVE NOT CALLED ME, O JACOB. When he saw the Holy One revealed over him, he immediately began saying to them: Will you please honor the Holy One just as my ancestors have honored him. It is so stated (in Gen. 48:15): THE GOD BEFORE WHOM MY ANCESTORS < ABRAHAM AND ISAAC > WALKED…. They said to him (the Shema' of Deut. 6:4): HEAR, O ISRAEL, THE LORD IS OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE. (Deut. R. 2:6; cf. Sifre to Deut. 6:4 (31).) Immediately (according to Gen. 47:31): ISRAEL BOWED DOWN UPON THE HEAD OF THE BED. He began to say in a whisper: Blessed be the name of his glorious kingdom forever and ever. (These words follow the first line of the Shema‘ in the liturgy before “And you shall love….” According to yBer. 5:8 (or 9) (14c) (bar.), the words were used after benedictions instead of Amen in the Temple. See also Pes. 56a, where R. Judah maintains that the words used to be omitted.) The Holy One said to him (in Prov. 35:2): IT IS THE GLORY OF GOD TO CONCEAL A MATTER.

[Another interpretation (of Gen. 29:31): WHEN THE LORD SAW THAT LEAH WAS HATED.] This text is related (to Deut. 21:15-17): WHEN A MAN HAS TWO WIVES, < THE ONE BELOVED AND THE OTHER HATED, AND WHEN BOTH THE BELOVED AND THE HATED HAVE BORNE HIM SONS WITH THE FIRST-BORN BELONGING TO THE HATED WOMAN; THEN, ON THE DAY THAT HE WILLS HIS PROPERTY TO HIS SONS AS AN INHERITANCE, HE MAY NOT TREAT THE SON OF THE BELOVED AS THE FIRST-BORN IN PREFERENCE TO THE SON OF THE HATED WHEN HE IS THE FIRST-BORN. INSTEAD, HE SHALL RECOGNIZE THE FIRST-BORN SON OF THE HATED WOMAN BY GIVING HIM A DOUBLE PORTION SINCE HE IS THE FIRST FRUIT OF HIS STRENGTH >. < (Deut. 21:15:) WHEN A MAN HAS >: This is Jacob, as stated (in Gen. 25:27): JACOB WAS A PERFECT MAN. (Deut. 21:15, cont.:) TWO WIVES: Leah and Rachel. (Ibid., cont.:) THE ONE BELOVED, i.e., Rachel, as stated (in Gen. 29:30): AND HE ALSO LOVED RACHEL. (Deut. 21:15, cont.:) AND THE OTHER HATED: i.e., Leah, as stated (in Gen. 29:31): WHEN THE LORD SAW THAT LEAH WAS HATED. (Deut. 21:15, cont.:) AND WHEN BOTH THE BELOVED AND THE HATED HAVE BORNE HIM SONS, i.e., both of them bore for him. (The passage may interpret banot (“daughters”) as bonot (“builders”) who would build up a worthy lineages.) Moreover, what Leah produced Rachel produced. (Similarly Gen. R. 70:15.) Leah produced kings, and so did Rachel [produce kings. Leah produced prophets, and so did Rachel produce prophets]. Leah produced judges, and so did Rachel. It is therefore stated (in Deut. 21:15): AND WHEN < BOTH THE BELOVED AND THE HATED > HAVE BORNE HIM SONS. (Deut. 21:16:) THEN, ON THE DAY THAT HE WILLS < HIS PROPERTY > TO HIS SONS AS AN INHERITANCE. When the time had come for him to depart from the world, (according to Gen. 49:1): THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS. (Deut. 21:16, cont.:) HE MAY NOT TREAT THE SON OF THE BELOVED, < i.e., > Joseph, AS THE FIRST-BORN. Why? (Vs. 17:) INSTEAD, HE SHALL RECOGNIZE THE FIRST-BORN SON OF THE HATED WOMAN < BY GIVING HIM A DOUBLE PORTION >. This was Reuben, as stated (in Gen. 49:3): REUBEN, YOU ARE MY FIRST-BORN, < MY MIGHT AND THE FIRST FRUIT OF MY STRENGTH, EXCELLING IN ELEVATION AND EXCELLING IN POWER >. < Jacob gave this blessing >, even though he said to his shame (in vs. 4): UNSTABLE AS WATER, YOU SHALL NO LONGER EXCEL; < FOR YOU WENT UP TO YOUR FATHER'S BED, THEN DEFILED IT >. What is the meaning of (ibid., cont.) HE WENT UP TO MY COUCH. When Moses would come, about whom it is written (in Exod. 19:3): THEN MOSES WENT UP TO GOD, he would redeem him. As Moses stood < there >, he sought mercy for him. It is so stated (in Deut. 33:6): LET REUBEN LIVE. The Holy One said (ibid., cont.): AND LET HIM NOT DIE. It turns out that he gets {compensation in proportion to both of them} [a pardon (Gk.: demos (“common people”). This meaning of demos may be suggested by demotikos agon, a public festival with games in connection with which amnesties might be given. Cf. Lat.: dimissus.) from the mouth of both of them] (i.e., God and Moses). Thus it is stated (in Deut. 21:17): INSTEAD, HE SHALL RECOGNIZE THE FIRST-BORN [SON OF THE HATED WOMAN] BY GIVING HIM A DOUBLE PORTION. (Deut. 33:6:) LET REUBEN LIVE, AND LET HIM NOT DIE; < i.e., > LET REUBEN LIVE in this world, AND LET HIM NOT DIE in the world to come. Why? (Deut. 21:17:) SINCE HE IS THE FIRST FRUIT OF HIS STRENGTH. [It is also written (in Gen. 49:3): MY MIGHT AND THE FIRST FRUIT OF MY STRENGTH.]

Thus with the very words with which Jacob concluded his blessing, Moses began to bless them. Moses said: I learn understanding from my elders (Ps. 119:100). When Isaac blessed Jacob, he said to him: And God Almighty bless thee (Gen. 28:3). How did he conclude his blessing? With the word call, as it is said: And Isaac called Jacob and blessed him (ibid., v. 1). And Jacob began where his father had ended, as it is said: And Jacob called his sons (Gen. 49:1), and concluded: And this is what their father spoke to them. When Moses blessed the tribes, he began where Jacob had left off, as is said: And this is the blessing, and he concluded with: Happy, art thou, O Israel (Deut. 33:29). Later, David began where Moses concluded, saying: Happy is the man (Ps. 1:1). Hence Scripture states: I learn understanding from my elders (Ps. 119:100).

And Jacob called unto his sons (Gen. 49:1). May it please our master to teach us whether the one who leads the congregation in prayer may respond “Amen” after the priests. Thus did our sages teach us: The person who leads the congregation in prayer is not permitted to respond “Amen” after the priests. (He might become confused by the interruption and err in his prayers (see Bava Batra 34a). He might also be considered inferior to the priests.) The fact that the person who leads the congregation in prayer may not respond “Amen” after the priest proves how precious he is to the Holy One, blessed be He. R. Hanan said: When ten men enter a synagogue, the one who recites the prayers preceding the Shema is called a lily among the thorns (Song 2:2).

And Jacob called unto his sons (Gen. 49:1). Scripture states elsewhere in allusion to this verse: He removeth the speech of men of trust, and taketh away the sense of the elders (Job 12:20). This verse refers to Isaac and Jacob, for both of them desired to disclose the secrets of the Holy One, blessed be He. Concerning Isaac it is written: And he called Esau, his eldest son (Gen. 27:1), to reveal to him what was to transpire in the Messianic age. That was the reason the Holy One, blessed be He, withdrew the knowledge of it from him. Jacob likewise wanted to reveal to his sons what would occur in the Messianic age, as it is said: He called unto his sons and said: “Gather yourselves together that I may tell you” (ibid. 49:1).

Another explanation of I will cry unto God Most High. This refers to Jacob. When his sons entered to receive their blessing, he began to distribute the honors among them. Whence do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, agreed with him? From the fact that you find that every blessing Jacob conferred upon each of the tribes, Moses invoked upon them later on. Therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, must have approved each blessing. When did he bless them? As he was about to depart from this world. Hence, And Jacob called unto his sons and said: “Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you” (Gen. 49:1).

Why did he say to them Gather yourselves together, assemble yourselves (Gen. 49:1–2)? He did so to let them realize that they would be exiled twice. After he had designated the elders among them, he began to rebuke them, saying: Reuben, thou art my firstborn (Gen. 49:3). From that very moment Israel merited reciting the Shema. Why? When Jacob was about to depart from this world, he reflected upon it and said: “My grandfather Abraham begot Isaac and Ishmael, and my father, Isaac, begot me and Esau; perhaps there is a blemish in my family.” When they heard this, they proclaimed in unison: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one (Deut. 6:4). Hence it is written: Hearken to Israel, thy father (Gen. 49:2).

Another comment on Then He openeth the ears of men: This verse alludes to Daniel, to whom the Holy One, blessed be He, revealed the time of redemption. (Megillah 3a. The Book of Daniel contains intimations concerning the Messianic age.) By their chastisement sealeth the decree similarly refers to Daniel, for He said to him: And thou, Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book (Dan. 12:4). Another comment on Then He openeth the ears of men: This verse refers to our patriarch Jacob, to whom the Holy One, blessed be He, revealed the time of redemption. Jacob indicated that he wished to disclose this information to his sons, when he said to them: Gather yourselves together, so that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the end of days (Gen. 49:1). However, the Holy One, blessed be He, sealed up his lips to restrain him from doing so. Hence, it says: Their chastisement sealeth the decree.

And it came to pass in the fortieth year, teaching that Moses did not rebuke Israel except close to his death. From whom did he learn this? From our father Jacob, who did not rebuke his sons except close to his death, as it says (Genesis 49:1), "And Jacob called his sons, Reuben, etc." He said to Reuben, "My son, why did I not rebuke you all these days? So that you would not leave me and go join my brother Esau." To teach you that one does not rebuke except close to death, because of the following four reasons: one does not rebuke except close to death so that the rebuked will not return and be rebuked again; and so that the rebuked will not hold a grudge against the rebuker; and so that the rebuked will not see the rebuker and be ashamed of him; and so that the rebuker will not need further rebuke. As it is said (Genesis 21:25), "And Abraham rebuked Abimelech," what does it say afterwards (ibid. 27) "And they made a covenant between them." And so it says (ibid. 26:27), "And Isaac said to them, 'Why have you come to me, etc.' And they said, 'We have seen that the Lord is with you; if you do evil to us, as we have not touched you.'"

Another interpretation of "Happy is the man" (Psalm 1:1): This refers to the righteous men. The prophets are happy because they give form to the image of God, and to the one who plants the tree. This is what the scripture means by "For the Lord God is a sun and shield" (Psalm 84:12). Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said: "Happy are they who are like the sun, which shines forth, and like a shield, which protects." Another interpretation of "shield": This refers to the Persian Targum for a curtain that surrounds a person, protecting them from the four winds. And how do we know that it includes the fourth wind? It is written, "You crown us with loving-kindness" (Psalm 5:13). Another interpretation of "sun" and "shield": This refers to Abraham, our forefather. "Sun" refers to Abraham, as it is written, "Who raised up righteousness from the east" (Isaiah 41:2) The shield represents Abraham, as it is said, "I am your shield" (Genesis 15:1). The God represents Abraham, as it is said, "You are a prince of God in our midst" (Genesis 23:6). Grace and glory God gives represent Abraham, as it is written, "And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold" (Genesis 13:2). "He does not withhold good from those who walk with integrity" represents Abraham, as it is said, "Walk before me, and be blameless" (Genesis 17:1). If Scripture speaks of Abraham in this way, then when it says, "He does not withhold good from those who walk with integrity," what does it mean to walk with integrity? Rather, just as Abraham, who walked with integrity before the Holy One, Blessed be He, had a shield, so too anyone who walks with integrity before Him has a shield. After him, what is written? "Happy is the man who trusts in You" (Psalms 84:13). Abraham is not written here, but rather "man," meaning all people. David said, "Happy is the man whom You discipline, Lord, and whom You teach from Your law" (Psalms 94:12). Rabbi Yudan opened by saying, "Do not boast before the king, and do not stand in the place of great men" (Proverbs 25:6). Rabbi Yudan read it from the place where this section was closed and from the place where the previous section was opened. Rabbi Pinchas worked an extended passage from Psalms 119:100, "I understand more than the aged." At first, the Holy One, Blessed be He, blessed His world, as it says, "And God blessed them" (Genesis 1:28). Once Noah stood, He blessed him, as it says, "And God blessed Noah and his sons" (Genesis 9:1). Once Abraham stood, He blessed him, as it says, "And God blessed Abraham in everything" (Genesis 24:1). What is the meaning of "it will be a blessing"? Rav Nachman said that He handed the blessings over to him and said, "Until now, I have been required to bless the world, but from now on, the blessings are in your hands, and whomever you bless will be blessed." Once Isaac stood, he blessed him, as it says, "And Abraham gave everything he had to Isaac" (Genesis 25:5). What did he give him? Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Nechemia, and the Rabbis (said): Rabbi Yehuda said it was the firstborn. Rabbi Nechemia said it was a blessing. And the Rabbis said it was burial and a deed of inheritance. Rabbi Levi said in the name of Rabbi Chama: they only gave him gifts. And why didn't they give him a blessing? It is like a king who had a garden and gave it to a tenant, and in it were all kinds of trees intertwined with each other, one of the Tree of Life and one of the Tree of Death. The tenant said, "If I water the Tree of Life, the Tree of Death will live with it. And if I do not water it, how will the Tree of Life live?" The tenant returned and said, "This year I will complete my tenancy and go, and what do I care about the king's garden?" Abraham said, "I will not bless Isaac now because the children of Ishmael and the children of Keturah are now being blessed." I am flesh and blood today, but tomorrow I will be in the grave, and what needs to be done in his world will be done. When Abraham died, God revealed Himself to Isaac and blessed him, as it says, "After Abraham's death, God blessed Isaac his son" (Genesis 25:11). And so He did to Jacob, as it says, "God appeared to Jacob again when he came from Paddan Aram, and He blessed him" (Genesis 35:9). And Isaac stood and blessed Jacob with giving, as it says, "May God give you of the dew of heaven" (Genesis 27:28), and he sealed it with a call, "And Isaac called Jacob, and he blessed him" (Genesis 28:1). Jacob stood to bless the tribes and began with what Isaac had sealed. This is what is written, "And Jacob called to his sons and said" (Genesis 49:1), and he sealed it with this, as it says, "And this is what their father said to them" (Genesis 49:28). Moses stood to bless Israel, and said, "Jacob is the firstborn of the Holy One, blessed be He," and he began with a call and sealed it with "And this is the blessing" (Deuteronomy 33:1), and he sealed it with "Happy are you" (Deuteronomy 33:29). When David stood, he opened with "God is my Lord," and sealed it with "Blessed are You, God" (Psalms 118:27).

Another thing that the verse (Psalms 97:7) said is, "All those who serve idols will be ashamed." Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rav Nachman, "In the future, the Holy One, blessed be He, will give real significance to idolatry that will come and bow down to the Holy One, blessed be He, and afterward, it will be ashamed of its worshippers." Rabbi Pinchas said, "In the future, the Holy One, blessed be He, will give speech to the gentiles, and it will speak before its worshippers in the future, saying to them, 'You have acquired eternal life and have bowed down to the one of whom it is said, "They have a mouth, but cannot speak." And you have made the subsidiary the primary.' Rabbi Yochanan said, 'Do not wonder, for when the Holy One, blessed be He, descended on Sinai, He gave strength to the gentiles, and they bowed down to Him.' Rabbi Tachlifa quoted a supporting verse (Psalms 97:7), 'All gods bow down to Him.' 'They shall bow down to Him' means only that they shall bow down to Him, as they already bowed down to Him on Sinai. Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Nechemia said, 'Just as the gentiles were shattered into pieces, so were its worshippers shattered into pieces,' as it is said (Zechariah 14:12), 'This shall be the plague.' And the rabbis say, 'Just as the gentiles were burned with light, so were its worshippers burned with light,' as it is said (Zechariah 14:12), 'And this shall be the plague with which the Lord will strike all the nations that waged war against Jerusalem - their flesh shall rot away while they stand on their feet, their eyes shall rot in their sockets, and their tongues shall rot in their mouths.'" Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, Rabbi Shmuel, and Rabbi Nehemia say: When the Holy One, blessed be He, will sit in judgment of the Gentiles and the Jews in the future, He judges the Jews favorably, and the Gentiles are ashamed. And what does the evil inclination do? It tries to sow discord between them, and they say: We seek justice that will be reversed. What does the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He judges them and obligates them, and they are ashamed again. If they had remained silent, they would have been ashamed only once. Therefore, they will be doubly ashamed in the future. And in the future, when every nation of Gentiles calls upon their god, some calling to the moon and some to the sun, they will not be answered because they are not real gods, and they will be ashamed, as it is said: "Let all the worshippers of graven images be ashamed." Then they will come before the Holy One, blessed be He, and He will say to them: "You have made the insignificant significant, and I make the significant insignificant, and I do not answer you because you did not come to Me first. If only you had come to Me first, I would have answered you, as it is said: 'They cried out, but there was no savior; to the Lord, but He did not answer them.' These are their gods, but they did not call out to the Lord." This is the Holy One, blessed be He, who does not answer them. Therefore, twice they shall be ashamed. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said that in the future, the Holy One, blessed be He, will judge Israel and purify them, and give a crimson garment to the righteous to enter the Garden of Eden, and bring the wicked into Gehenna. Then He will take them out and bring them into the Garden of Eden, saying to them, "Behold, there is a place for the righteous and additional empty places." So that you will not say, "If we had repented, there would not have been any room for us in the Garden of Eden with the righteous." He will then take the righteous out of the Garden of Eden and bring them into Gehenna, saying to them, "Behold, there is a place for the wicked and additional empty places." So that you will not say, "If we were obligated, there would not have been any room for us in Gehenna." Rather, the wicked will inherit Gehenna for themselves and for you. As the verse says, "Instead of your shame you shall have double" (Isaiah 61:7). David said, "To whom does the shame belong? To the wicked," as it says, "Let the wicked be ashamed, let them be silent in the grave" (Psalm 31:18). Rav said, "Anyone who finds fault in it will not see the good in it," as it says, "How great is your goodness, which you have hidden away for those who fear you" (Psalm 31:20). Rabbi Abdimi from Haifa said that the Holy One, blessed be He, will make 310 worlds for every righteous person. As it says, "To grant an inheritance to those who love me" (Proverbs 8:21). The letters of "those who love me" (yesh b'gematriya) add up to 310. Rabbi Yitzchak ben Tardion said that the sword of the Holy One, blessed be He, has sixteen faces. As it says, "Join them one to another into one stick, and they shall become one in your hand" (Ezekiel 37:17). Just as the measure of punishment is minimal, so the measure of good is much greater. Rav Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer bar Avina that the Holy One, blessed be He, revealed the end to Jacob and to Daniel. To Jacob, as it says, "And Jacob called to his sons" (Genesis 49:1), and to Daniel, as it says, "And he said, 'Go your way, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end'" (Daniel 12:9). "And when it comes to revealing the end, what does it say? 'But you, Daniel, seal up the words and seal the book.' Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, 'You have hidden the Torah and the commandments from Me in this world, and I will hide for you the same goodness that is prepared for the righteous in the future world,' as it says, 'How abundant is Your goodness that You have hidden away for those who fear You.' Rabbi Yudan said that the Holy One, blessed be He, said, 'You do according to your ability, and I will do according to My ability.' Rabbi Yonatan said, 'There are three pleasing languages: the Roman language for war, the Greek language for conversation, and the Assyrian language for prayer. Beware of mixing them up.' "

האספו ואגידה לכם את אשר יקרא אתכם באחרית הימים . Jacob wanted to reveal to the brothers details about the final redemption; this is why he used the expression האספר, "gather together," since redemption cannot come when there is strife and unprovoked hatred between them.

Judaism is a radical break with this way of seeing things. Instead, time becomes the arena of human growth. The future is not like the past. Nor can it be predicted, foreseen, the way the end of any myth can be foreseen. Jacob, at the end of his life, told his children, “Gather round, and I will tell you what will happen to you at the end of days” (Gen. 49:1). Rashi, quoting the Talmud, says: “Jacob sought to reveal the end, but the Divine Presence departed from him.” We cannot foretell the future, because it depends on us – how we act, how we choose, how we respond.

SPEAK UNTO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. The priests have no greater duties with regard to the festivals than the Israelites, therefore He did not admonish Aaron and his sons in this section, but the children of Israel, a term which includes all of them together, since He did not explain the Additional Offerings [for the festivals] in this section. (These are found in Numbers beginning with 28:9 up to the end of Chapter 29.) However, He mentioned the festivals here in Torath Kohanim (i.e. Book of Leviticus) because they are days of offerings, and He alludes to them, just as He said, And ye shall bring an offering made by fire unto the Eternal, (Further, Verse 8, etc.) and at the end of this section He states, These are the appointed seasons of the Eternal, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to bring an offering made by fire unto the Eternal, a burnt-offering, and a meal-offering, a peace-offering, and drink-offerings. (Ibid., Verse 37.) He did not, however, prolong the subject by explaining the Additional Offerings, since He did not want them to be binding upon the children of Israel when in the desert, and after He had counted [at the end of the desert period] those who were to come into the Land, as narrated in the Book of Numbers, (Numbers 1:1-47. Literally: “the fifth of the census,” meaning that one [of the Five Books of Moses] which begins with the census [taken in the second year after the exodus].) and He commanded, Unto these the Land shall be divided, (Numbers 26:53.) He then explained all the Additional Offerings in the section of Pinchas, which they were to offer in the Land immediately and throughout the generations. Therefore He said [here in this Book of Leviticus] with reference to [the Service on] the Day of Atonement, And he [i.e., Aaron] did as the Eternal commanded Moses, (Above, 16:34.) meaning that he did so in the desert [but the Additional Offerings for the other festivals were not binding in the desert]. Now He mentioned in this section the “he-lamb of the sheaf” (Further, Verse 12.) and the two lambs of the Festival of Shevuoth, (Ibid., Verse 19.) because it is well-known that they were binding only in the Land, since they are brought on account of the bread [of the first-fruits] (Ibid., Verse 20. So also the he-lamb of the sheaf came on account of the meal-offering of the omer (Verse 12) which was binding only in the Land of Israel.) concerning which He said, When ye are come into the Land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, (Ibid., Verse 10.) but the observance of the days themselves [as festivals] was binding immediately. He mentioned the Sabbath (Verse 3.) among the appointed seasons which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, (In Verse 2 before us.) [although the Sabbath is not proclaimed by the children of Israel, since its sanctity has been affirmed by G-d and is fixed throughout the generations], because it is also “an appointed day” [invariably fixed by G-d as the holy day] and we may thus refer to it as “a holy convocation.” Afterwards, He separated the rest of the festivals from the Sabbath, saying of them which ye shall proclaim in their appointed season, (Verse 4.) meaning on whatever day of the week they happen to fall, but the Sabbath is fixed and occurs [always] on the same day, hence it is not necessary that we proclaim it in its season. (Hence in Verse 2 before us which includes the Sabbath among “the appointed seasons,” it says only which shall ye proclaim to be holy convocations, but does not add the expression “in their season,” for this means on whatever day they may happen to fall, whereas the Sabbath is always on a fixed day of the week.) And in the opinion of our Rabbis, (Torath Kohanim, Emor 9:5.) which ye shall proclaim in their appointed season alludes to the intercalations [of an extra month in a leap year] so that you proclaim them as festivals. (That is to say, if for any reason the Great Court decided that the year be intercalated with an extra month, it admits of no doubt, and the appointed seasons of the Eternal are shifted accordingly.) The correct interpretation appears to me to be that the meaning of the verse The appointed seasons of the Eternal, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are My appointed seasons, (In Verse 2 before us.) is that it refers [only] to the festivals mentioned further on in the sections: In the first month etc. (Verse 5.) [but it does not refer to the Sabbath]. It is for this reason that He states there once again, These are the appointed seasons of the Eternal, (Verse 4.) because He had interrupted with the subject of the Sabbath. Thus He states, The appointed seasons of the Eternal, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are My appointed seasons, (In Verse 2 before us.) meaning that no manner of servile work [be done on them], but the Sabbath you are to keep, making it a Sabbath of solemn rest (Verse 3.) from all manner of work (See Ramban further in Verse 7 for the difference between “no manner of ‘m’lecheth avodah’ (servile work)” found in connection with the festivals, and “no manner of ‘m’lachah’ (work)” stated in connection with the Sabbath.) whatsoever, for He admonishes concerning the Sabbath many times. He further alludes here [to the law that even] when the Sabbath falls on one of [the days of] the festivals, we must not suspend [the law of the Sabbath] so that the preparation of food be permitted on it [as it is on a festival day when it falls on a weekday, but instead it is prohibited]. A similar case [where the phrase these are refers to the continuation of a subject which had previously been mentioned, because in the middle Scripture interrupts with another subject], is the verse, These are the words which the Eternal hath commanded, that ye should do them, (Exodus 35:1.) which refers to the Tabernacle and its vessels which he [Moses] will mention in the second section, and [in the next verses] he interrupts with the Sabbath: Six days shall work be done, and on the seventh day there shall be to you a holy day etc.; (Ibid., Verse 2.) and then he again says, This is the thing which the Eternal commanded … Take ye from among you an offering, (Ibid., Verses 4-5.) this being the [same] command that Scripture had mentioned at the beginning, but because it was interrupted with another subject, Scripture had to start from the beginning again. Proof for this interpretation is that He does not mention [here] in the case of the Sabbath, and ye shall bring an offering made by fire unto the Eternal as He mentions at each and every festival, (Further, Verse 8, etc.) and at the end of the section He states, These are the appointed seasons of the Eternal, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to bring an offering made by fire unto the Eternal … beside the Sabbaths of the Eternal. (Further, Verses 37-38.) [This shows] that the Sabbaths are not included within the terms of the appointed seasons of the Eternal. A further proof is that in the second section [i.e., in Verse 4 where He reverts to the festivals after having mentioned the Sabbath], He does not say, And the Eternal spoke unto Moses, saying, as He says in the case of each and every festival; (Ibid., Verse 9, etc.) for the first communication [to Moses] was indeed concerning the commandments of the festivals, but He mentioned the Sabbath in order to exclude from it the law of the festivals [i.e., that when the Sabbath coincides with a festival, the preparation of food which is permitted on a festival day, is forbidden since it is also a Sabbath, as explained above], but not in order to explain its commandments and laws [and therefore there was no need to repeat the verse, And the Eternal spoke unto Moses, saying]. This is the reason why He does not state [here] about the Sabbath And ye shall bring an offering made by fire unto the Eternal, as He states concerning the festivals, (This is because His intention in mentioning the Sabbath was not to explain all its commandments and laws, but only to exclude etc. (as explained in the text).) and He mentions it at the end together with the vow-offerings and the freewill-offerings (Further, Verse 38: beside the Sabbaths of the Eternal … and beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill-offerings.) which are not mentioned here, as I have explained [above]. And this is the intention of the interpretation of the Sages, (Torath Kohanim, Emor 9:7.) who said: “What has the matter of the Sabbath to do with the festivals? etc.,” since the Sabbath is not included at all in the terms of the appointed seasons of the Eternal, but Scripture only put them in juxtaposition [for the reason mentioned above]. The meaning of ‘mikra’ei kodesh’ (holy convocations), is that all people should come together on that day and be assembled to sanctify it, for it is a commandment upon Israel to be gathered together in G-d’s House on the festival day to hallow it publicly with prayer and praise to G-d, and with clean garments, and to make it a day of feasting, as it is said in the tradition, (The Hebrew word is kabalah, and is here understood as referring to a Scriptural passage outside the Five Books of Moses. This usage of the word is found already in a Mishnah in Taanith 15 a.) Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions unto him for whom nothing is prepared, for this day is holy unto our Lord; neither be ye grieved, for the joy of the Eternal is your strength. (Nehemiah 8:10.) Thus the expression mikra kodesh (a holy convocation) is similar to: ‘kru’ei’ (those called) of the congregation; (Numbers 1:16.) afterwards they eat ‘ha’kru’im’ (they that are called). (I Samuel 9:13.) Similarly, over the whole habitation of Mount Zion, and over ‘mikra’eha’, (Isaiah 4:5.) meaning the places where they are called to, and where those called of the congregation assemble. Onkelos, however, [in rendering the Hebrew mikra’ei kodesh as m’arei kadish — ”holy events”], understood [the word mikra’ei] as similar to the expression that which ‘yikra’ (shall befall) you in the end of days, (Genesis 49:1.) an expression of “event,” meaning that whenever the festivals occur, you should make them holy. And our Rabbis of blessed memory have said: (Sifre, Pinchas 147.) “Proclaim them with [special] food and drink and clean garments;” that is to say, the nature of these [festival] days should not be to you like that of other days, but instead you should make them occasions of holiness, changing them by food and dress from the common to the holy. This is also the opinion of Onkelos [who translated mikra’ei kodesh as “holy events”].

מקראי קודש, “a holy convocation.” According to Nachmanides the exact meaning of this expression is that all the people will be assembled on that day in preparation of performing a sacred task. On such days it is a commandment for the people to assemble in or near the House of G’d [in accordance with the regulations governing ritual purity. Ed.] Public prayers would be recited, songs of praise for Hashem would be sung, etc. The people would honour such days by clean and appropriate clothing for the occasion. They would also observe the second part of the day as a day of feasting, eating and drinking well in honour of G’d. Onkelos views the origin of the word מקראי as related to a happening, rather than as related to “following a call.” He quotes אשר יקרא אתכם באחרית הימים, “what is going to happen to you at the end of days,” (Genesis 49,1) as another example of the word מקרא or יקרא having this meaning. In other words, “whenever such a day or date occurs, make a point of treating it as a holy day.” This day or these days are to be treated as something special, a fact that is reflected in one’s bearing, cleanliness, distinctive dress and superior food. All this is implied in Onkelos’ meaning.

“In the days to come” [49:1]. Jacob called his children and wanted to tell them when the Messiah would come. Prophecy departed from Jacob and immediately changed the subject. (Rashi, Genesis, 49:1.) Jacob said that the redemption for us would be like the redemption from Egypt and the redemption will be better because wisdom and understanding will be greater in the days of the Messiah. (Bahya, Genesis, 49:1.)

[261] What of Isaac? What of Jacob? They too are confessed as prophets by many other evidences, but particularly by their speeches addressed to their children. For “Gather ye together that I may proclaim what shall happen to you at the end of the days” (Gen. 49:1) were the words of one inspired. For apprehension of the future does not belong to man.

As Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said that it is written: “And Jacob called his sons and said, Gather around and I will tell you what will occur to you in the end of days” (Genesis 49:1). Jacob wanted to reveal to his sons when the complete redemption would arrive at the end of days (see Daniel 12:13), but the Divine Presence abandoned him, rendering him unable to prophesy. He said: Perhaps the Divine Presence has abandoned me because, Heaven forfend, one of my descendants is unfit, as was the case with my grandfather Abraham, from whom Ishmael emerged, and like my father Isaac, from whom Esau emerged. His sons said to him: Hear Israel, our father, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One. They said: Just as there is only one God in your heart, so too, there is only one in our hearts. At that moment Jacob our father said in praise: Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom for ever and ever, as all his children were righteous.

Yaakov called for his sons and said, Gather around and I will tell you what will happen to you in latter days.

And our father Jakob called his sons, and said to them, Gather together, and I will teach yon the concealed end, the secret mysteries, the recompense of reward for the just, and the punishment of the wicked, and the blessedness of Eden, what it is. And the twelve tribes of Jakob assembled and surrounded the golden bed whereon our father Jakob lay, desiring that he should teach them (at the) end in benediction and consolation. Then was revealed to him the secret that had been hidden from him, and then was opened the door which had been shut to him. Our father Jakob turned therefore and blessed his sons, every man according to his good did he bless him. When the twelve tribes of Jakob were assembled, and surrounded the golden bed whereon our father Jakob lay, they expected that he would make known to them the order of blessing and consolation: but they were hidden from him. Our father Jakob answered and said to them: From Abraham my father’s father arose the profane Ishmael and all the sons of Keturah; and from Izhak my father arose the profane Esau, my brother; and I am afraid lest there should be among you a man whose heart is separated from his brethren to go and worship before strange idols. The twelve tribes of Jakob answered all together, and said, HEAR US, ISRAEL OUR FATHER! THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD! And Jakob our father answered, and said, May His Great Name be blessed for ever and ever!

And Jakob called his sons and said to them, Purify yourselves from uncleanness, and I will show you the hidden mysteries, the ends concealed, the recompense of reward for the righteous, the retribution of the wicked, and the bower of Eden, what it is. And the twelve tribes of Israel gathered themselves together around the golden bed whereon he reclined, and where was revealed to him the Shekina of the Lord, (though) the end for which the king Meshiha is to come had been concealed from him. Then said he, Come, and I will declare to you what shall befall you at the end of the days.

Genesis 49,2. “gather around sons of Yaakov, and ‎listen to Yisrael your father.” In order to understand why ‎Yaakov appears to repeat himself, we must first turn to the ‎‎Zohar III 196. With reference to Isaiah 50,10 ‎מי בכם ירא ה' ‏שומע בקול עבדו אשר הלך בחשכים ואין נגה לו יבטח בשם הה' וישען באלוקיו?‏‎, ‎‎“Who amongst you that obeys the voice of His servant that walks ‎in darkness and has no light? Let him trust in the name of ‎‎Hashem and rely upon Elokim.” What is the meaning ‎of the words: “that obeys the voice of His servant” in this verse? ‎It has been explained that this is the tzaddik who offers ‎prayers every day. He is therefore so familiar in those regions that ‎if he fails to come to the synagogue for a single day, enquiries are ‎made in heaven concerning why he has not appeared. Still, this ‎does not explain the meaning of the words: “that obeys the voice ‎of His servant?” Whose voice is that? If you were to say that “His ‎servant” refers to a prophet or some other person, what is the ‎relation between some other person and the prayer? G’d is ‎perceived as listening, i.e. responding positively, to those who are ‎truly His servants. When the Israelites are in a state of grace, ‎זכאין‎, when they all gather together they can hear heavenly voices ‎proclaiming that these are the sons of precious Yaakov and that ‎therefore they deserve a hearing. When Yaakov appears to be ‎repeating himself, this is not quite so; in effect he is encouraging ‎his sons to not only be the sons of Yaakov, but to listen to him in ‎his capacity of Yisrael, i.e. to rise to a higher spiritual level than ‎that they had been on up until this moment. If they would be ‎able to do this, they would indeed hear from his lips prophetic ‎words concerning their future, words that would reveal to them ‎some secrets about the prelude to the ultimate redemption of the ‎Jewish people.

Gather together, and I will tell you, assemble and listen. (Bereishis 49:1-2) There are two types of gatherings. One is to awaken the power of influence, represented by Yosef the tzadik. This aspect was realized by them, preparing them correctly for the exile. The second type is to be ready to receive, symbolized by Binyamin. This aspect was not yet perfected. Therefore, the revelation of the final redemption was hidden from Yaakov, as it marked the beginning of the exile. The primary exile is the inability to unite the hearts of Bnei Yisrael as one, which we pray for in the blessing of redemption, "and gather in our exiles." On Shabbos, when everything becomes unified, there is an awakening of redemption. The phrase "And Yaakov lived in the land of Mitzrayim" means that Hashem provided healing before the punishment. Yaakov saw the benefit of the exile in Mitzrayim, as Hashem told Avraham, "And afterwards, they will leave with a great inheritance." In Mitzrayim, we were formed into a nation, likened by our sages to a baby being born from an iron furnace (Devarim 4:20). This is the secret of the end of days that Yaakov wanted to reveal. This was also known to Yosef, which is why he cried when the brothers spoke to him. The brothers were concerned, feeling the darkness of the exile and Yaakov's death. They feared they had caused his demise, believing Yaakov had perfected everything and would not be subject to death. However, our sages explained that "Yaakov did not die" (Ta’anis 5b). Yosef reassured them that Yaakov brought the light of life into Mitzrayim to sustain a great nation.

“Gather together and I will tell you...unite and hear” (Bereishis 49:1-2). There are two types of gatherings: one represented by Yosef, which brings down blessings from Above, and the other by Yehuda, representing the ultimate Mashiach ben David, which comes from the energy of the receiver. The pasuk in Tehillim (103:20) teaches us that Bnei Yisrael awaken Hashem's words and then are prepared to hear them. These elements remain with us daily, as reflected in the Shma and in prayer, which requires heartfelt effort. Our forefathers and the children of Yaakov are the foundations of the world, having planted deep roots for us. Their actions were purposeful, as seen in the pasuk: “These are all the tribes of Yisrael and he blessed them,” meaning he connected them to their divine source. The phrase “and he blessed them” refers to their connection above nature, with Yosef being the explicit vessel of blessing—Shalom. This is hinted at in the pasuk, where Yosef's blessings are mentioned twelve times, paralleling the twelve tribes. Yosef received the collective blessing of his brothers, as detailed in Yaakov’s blessing to him, indicating that Yosef's role was to distribute the blessings to the other tribes. In Shir HaShirim (8:6), various elements symbolize the forefathers: “Love” refers to Avraham, “as fierce as death” to Yitzchak, “darts of fire” to Yaakov, and “a blazing flame” to Yosef. These foundational traits are deeply embedded in Bnei Yisrael. Therefore, the verse continues: "Vast waters cannot extinguish the love," signifying the enduring nature of their spiritual legacy.

הקבצו ושמעו, “assemble and listen!” Yaakov refers to both of his names when addressing his children. He speaks of “Yaakov” when referring to his בנים, children, as at the time when his sons were still children he had not yet been given the name “Yisrael.” When he refers to himself as simply “your father,” he uses his name “Yisrael.” It is also possible to understand the words אביכם ישראל as a reference to “your Heavenly father O Israel.” In that event Yaakov introduces his blessings by exhorting his sons to remain loyal to G’d, who is known in Rabbinic terms as ישראל סבא, “grandfather (of) Israel.” This would account for the repetition of the names Yaakov and Yisrael respectively in these two verses. I have found some support for this theory in Bereshit Rabbah (Vilna edition under the heading שיטה חדשה לברכת יעקב),”on the first of Yaakov’s blessings.” The Midrash says that what occurred at this stage in Yaakov’s life may be compared to the following parable. A king had a trusted servant and was in the habit of leaving everything in that servant’s care. When the servant was about to die he called in his sons in order to make free men out of them, and to tell them where they could find the documents proving that they were free men. When the servant suddenly noted that the King was observing what he was about to do, he did an about-turn by asking his sons to serve the King all their lives just as he himself had served him all his life. Yaakov experienced something similar. First he wanted to reveal to his sons the end of their exile, when and how they would be redeemed. When he noted that G’d looked at the matter he was going to do with disfavour, he switched gears and exhorted his sons to remain loyal to G‘d throughout their lives just as he had been i.e. האלו-הים אשר התהלכו אבותי לפניו, “the Lord before Whom my fathers have walked.” G’d had expressed concern that whereas Yaakov had called upon his sons, he had not called upon Him. This is what the prophet (Isaiah 43,22) referred to when he said: “upon Me you did not call O Yaakov!” When Yaakov heard this he prostrated himself at the head of the bed and whispered “blessed be the name of His exalted Majesty forever more.”

הקבצו ושמעו, this was the introduction to his prophetic utterances, just as in Moses’ parting speech to the nation the words האזינו השמים והארץ (Deut. 32,1) were the opening line. The prophetess Devorah in her victory song extolling G’d, (Judges 5,3) also began with a similar opening, i.e. שמעו מלכים, “listen, pay attention, kings!”

ושמעו אל ישראל אביכם, preserve the teachings Israel taught throughout his life. When you do that you will be entitled to call yourselves בני ישראל, “The Children of Israel.” He, on the other hand, will be proud to call himself “your father.” It means that you as well as I have contended successfully when facing challenges set for you by G’d and by man. As a result, you will not forfeit the good G’d has in store for you.

Assemble and hear, sons of Jacob, and heed Israel your father.

[3] Another interpretation: "and Yaakov was called." It is said in scriptures: You have held my eyelids open; (Psalm 77:5) This is Jacob, to whom the Holy One, blessed be He, showed everything that will happen: how the prophets will stand, how the Temple will be built and destroyed, how Gog and Magog will rise up against God and His Messiah, and how God will go out and fight them, all to show His children everything, as it is written, "Gather yourselves together, and hear, ye sons of Jacob; and hearken unto Israel your father" (Genesis 49:2). When will Gog and Magog rise up? As it is written, "And it shall come to pass in the end of days, that I will bring thee against My land" (Ezekiel 38:16). When will God build His Temple? As it is written, "And it shall come to pass in the end of days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established" (Isaiah 2:2). When will the kingdoms stand? As it is written, "And say, How long, O Lord?" (Habakkuk 1:2). Once God had revealed everything to His children, He became concealed from Jacob, and his heart was sealed, as it is written, "My heart was hot within me, while I was musing the fire burned" (Psalms 39:4). This can be compared to a king who made a trust for his faithful friend. He entrusted his treasures to him, and when he was about to die, he called his children and said to them, "Where are the treasures of the king?" The friend knew the answer, but when he saw the king's distress, he said, "Honor the king as you have honored me." Likewise, Jacob sought to show his children what was to come, and immediately the Holy One, blessed be He, appeared to him. He had nothing to say but "Fear the Lord, and hearken unto Israel your father" (Genesis 49:2), and so it is said, "You have held my eyelids open;" (Psalms 77:5).

Chapter (82) 83: Prophets [1] "I will assemble Jacob, all of you; I will bring together the remnant of Israel;. (Micah 2:12). Like it is said in scriptures: Assemble and listen, and complete [note: last word גומר doesn't exist in verse] (Genesis 49:2). Although the exact time of judgment day is unknown, I say to you that when you gather and assemble, at that moment you will be redeemed, as it is said, "I will surely gather all of you, O Jacob; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold, like a flock in its pasture, a noisy multitude of men" (Micah 2:12). "Reuben, you are my firstborn" (Genesis 49:3), I have not seen a blemish in you since I was born. "My might and the beginning of my strength" (same verse), since the day I was born I have been saying, "Perhaps Reuben will go up to the roof and die, or he will go down and fall." You were the beginning of my strength. "Excelling in dignity and excelling in power" (same verse), and because of the sin you committed, they took three crowns away from you and gave them to your brothers: the firstborn to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingdom to Judah. Otherwise, you would have been the firstborn. "Excelling in dignity," that is the priesthood, as it is said, "And Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things" (Exodus 28:38). "Excelling in power," I was worthy of purifying them, as it is written, "To cleanse and to sprinkle" (Leviticus 14:56). "Unstable as water" (Genesis 49:4), our rabbis have taught that three liquids are forbidden because of exposure: water, wine, and milk. If one finds exposed milk, water, or wine, they should be spilled out, just as you are unstable as water. Alternatively, "unstable" means that you acted recklessly, disgracefully, and insulted others. Just as the vessels in which liquids are poured out or stored become unusable, but the liquids themselves remain, so too you, because of your sin, should not remain. Another thing: is raging like water. Just as water purifies for everyone, so too will you purify your sins when the one who is saved from the water comes to give you blood, and who is this but Moses, as it is written, "She called his name Moses, for I drew him out of the water" (Exodus 2:10). And when does he give you blood? When you spread out your bed (Genesis 49:14), when he comes to ascend Mount Nebo, as it is written, "Let Reuben live and not die" (Deuteronomy 33:6). "Simeon and Levi are brothers" (Genesis 49:5), and not only were they brothers, but they became brothers to do justice, as it is said, "And two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, took each man his sword" (Genesis 34:25). Their weapons are instruments of violence (Genesis 49:5). The Greek language is their swords. Jacob said, "If these two tribes sit together, they will destroy the world. But I will scatter them, divide them among Jacob and disperse them among Israel" (Genesis 49:7). "Judah, your brothers will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies" (Genesis 49:8), referring to his killing of Esau. Similarly, Moses said, "His hands are his to contend with; you helped him against his foes" (Deuteronomy 33:7). "Judah, your lion's cub; from prey, my son, you have gone up" (Genesis 49:9), which is as you were named. So did your mother say, "This time I will thank God" (Genesis 29:35), and she praised God in the story of Tamar, and all the tribes praised her. "The sons of my concubine have risen against me" (Genesis 49:29), Tamar's tragedy, that she and her two sons were already doomed, as it says "they brought her out and burned her" (Genesis 38:24), but she confessed and saved herself and her two sons, just as Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were saved whole when they were thrown into the furnace. "He crouches like a lion, like a lioness--who dares to rouse him?" (Genesis 49:9), referring to David, the anointed one from you, as it says "whose heart is like that of a lion" (2 Samuel 17:10). "Forbidding the vine its fruit [and the donkey's colt to drink] (Genesis 49:11). This refers to the Messiah who will arise from you, as it is written, 'humble and riding on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey' (Zechariah 9:9). And to the flute and the finisher. Where are the Israelites forbidden and their sins atoned for? In the territory of Judah in Jerusalem. 'The scepter shall not depart from Judah' (Genesis 49:10) refers to the kingdom, 'nor a lawgiver' (ibid.) refers to the leader, 'until Shiloh comes' (ibid.) refers to the Messiah, 'and to him shall be the obedience of the people' (ibid.). 'And the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king' (Hosea 3:5), and similarly it says, 'and she ate and was satisfied, and left over' (Ruth 2:14). 'And she ate' refers to the leader, as it is written, 'and from among your brothers you shall appoint a leader' (Deuteronomy 17:15), 'and was satisfied' refers to the kingdom, and 'left over' refers to the leadership. Zebulun shall dwell by the seashore, and he shall be a haven for ships (Genesis 49:13)." "He who makes ships, goes forth and comes back and brings sufficiency to the tribe of Yissachar, who occupy themselves with Torah, as it is said, Yissachar is a strong-boned donkey, crouching among the sheepfolds. And he saw a resting place that was good, and the land that it was pleasant, and he inclined his shoulder to bear, and became a servant to tribute. (Genesis 49:14-15). Those who toil in Torah, as it is said, "And of the children of Yissachar, who had understanding of the times, to know what Yisrael ought to do; the heads of them were two hundred; and all their brothers were at their commandment." (1 Chronicles 12:33). This teaches that two hundred members of the Sanhedrin stood from the tribe of Yissachar, and all of them were with the power of Zebulun, who go out to the sea and bring them [Yissachar] what they need, as it is said, "Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out, and Yissachar, in your tents." (Deuteronomy 33:18)." "Dan will judge his people" (Genesis 49:16). This refers to rest. "Let Dan be a serpent" (ibid. v. 17) refers to Samson, who, just as a serpent bites on its own, so too Samson fought and killed on his own. Another interpretation is that just as a serpent doesn't die if it is bitten on its tail or belly, because it only dies if it is bitten on the head (as it says, "You will strike his head," Genesis 3:15), so too Samson, when he was bound with his hands and feet, and his strength was not known, as soon as his hair was cut, his strength left him (Judges 16:19). Yet, even so, he bit the heels of a horse and its rider fell backward (Genesis 49:17), as he grasped both pillars and brought the house down (Judges 16:29), and Jacob exclaimed, "I have waited for Your salvation, O Lord" (Genesis 49:18). "Gad, a troop shall tramp upon him" (ibid. v. 19) refers to Elijah, who crushed the gang of a certain ruler. "He shall provide the first part for himself" (ibid. v. 20) refers to Asher, whose land produces rich fruits and excellent oil, and he brings olive oil as an offering (ibid.). "Naphtali is a hind let loose" (ibid. v. 21) refers to all those who study the Torah and are beloved to the Almighty like deer, as it says, "A loving hind and a graceful doe" (Proverbs 5:19). "Joseph is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a fountain" (Genesis 49:22). When Pharaoh heard Joseph's interpretation of his dreams, he said that Joseph was wise and discerning (Genesis 41:39). "His eyes are darker than wine" (Genesis 49:12) refers to Joseph's children, whom the other tribes did not begrudge, and the children of Joseph say to Joshua, "We are a numerous people and God has blessed us until now" (Joshua 17:14). Joshua said to them, "This is what you say, and yet you are not afraid of the evil eye?" They replied, "Jacob our father already prayed for us that the evil eye should not rule over us, as it is said, 'Against me [Jacob] was the evil eye' (Genesis 49:27), and Benjamin is compared to a wolf that tears (Genesis 49:27). In the Temple, which was built within its borders, they would sacrifice there one lamb, etc. (Numbers 28:4). Once he blessed each person according to their needs, he made them into tribes, as it is said, 'These are the tribes of Israel' (Genesis 49:28). He said to them, "Behold, I have blessed you," as it is said, 'And this is what their father spoke to them and blessed them' (Genesis 49:28). A faithful man will come and seal my blessings, and who is this? It is Moses, as it is said, 'And this is the blessing with which Moses blessed' (Deuteronomy 33:1)."

“Assemble and hear, sons of Jacob” (Genesis 49:2) – Rabbi Berekhya, sometimes he said it in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyya and sometimes he said it in the name of the Rabbis from there: (From Babylon (Rashash; cf. Matnot Kehuna). ) From here [it may be derived] that they were scattered and an angel came and assembled them. (This is derived from the fact that after Jacob said “gather” (49:1), the next verse is framed entirely in the third person: “Assemble and hear, sons of Jacob, and listen to Israel your father” (49:2). This is because it was stated by an angel.) Rabbi Tanḥuma said: From here, that they were scattered and he assembled them with the Divine Spirit. “And listen to [el] Israel your father” (Genesis 49:2) – Rabbi Yudan and Rabbi Pinḥas: Rabbi Yudan said: Listen to the God [El] of Israel your father. Rabbi Pinḥas said: Your father Israel is like a god [el]. Just as the Holy One blessed be He creates worlds, so, your father creates worlds. (The world was created due to the merit of Jacob (Vayikra Rabba 36:4). ) Just as the Holy One blessed be He distributes worlds, so, your father distributes worlds. (Jacob’s blessings to his sons influenced the portions they would receive in the Land of Israel, or the spiritual blessings they would receive (see Maharzu; Etz Yosef). ) Elazar ben Aḥui said: From here Israel merited the recitation of Shema. When Jacob our patriarch was passing from the world, he called his twelve sons. He said to them: ‘Listen to the God [El] of Israel your father who is in Heaven. Do you, perhaps, have in your heart dissension over the Holy One blessed be He?’ (Do you have any doubts about God? ) They said: ‘“Hear, Israel” (Deuteronomy 6:4) our father, just as you do not have in your heart dissension over the Holy One blessed be He, so, there is no dissension in our heart. Rather, “the Lord is our God, the Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4).’ He too expressed with his lips and said: ‘Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom for ever and ever.’ Rabbi Berekhya and Rabbi Ḥelbo in the name of Rabbi Shmuel: That is why Israel recites early in the morning and late in the evening each day: Hear Israel, our patriarch, from the Cave of Makhpela: The same matter that you commanded us, we still practice it: “The Lord is our God, the Lord is one.”

Another matter: “Hear, Israel” (Deuteronomy 6:4) – from when did Israel merit to recite Shema? It was from the time when Jacob was about to die. He summoned all the tribes (Jacob’s sons, the progenitors of the tribes. ) and said to them: ‘Will you perhaps prostrate yourselves to another god after I pass from the world?’ From where is this derived? For so it is written: “Assemble and hear, sons of Jacob [and heed Israel your father]” (Genesis 49:2). What is “and heed Israel [el Yisrael] your father”? He said to them: ‘The God of Israel [El Yisrael] is your Father.’ They said to him: “Hear, Israel: The Lord is our God, the Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4), and he said in a whisper: ‘Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom for ever and ever.’ Rabbi Levi said: What does Israel say now? ‘Hear, our father Israel; the same matter that you commanded us, we continue to observe: “The Lord is our God, the Lord is one.”’

Why did he say to them Gather yourselves together, assemble yourselves (Gen. 49:1–2)? He did so to let them realize that they would be exiled twice. After he had designated the elders among them, he began to rebuke them, saying: Reuben, thou art my firstborn (Gen. 49:3). From that very moment Israel merited reciting the Shema. Why? When Jacob was about to depart from this world, he reflected upon it and said: “My grandfather Abraham begot Isaac and Ishmael, and my father, Isaac, begot me and Esau; perhaps there is a blemish in my family.” When they heard this, they proclaimed in unison: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one (Deut. 6:4). Hence it is written: Hearken to Israel, thy father (Gen. 49:2).

If man and his wife had been able to maintain their state of innocence, the drop of semen from which a fetus develops would not be called a טפה סרוחה, an evil smelling drop. Instead, it would be called זרע קודש, holy seed. The subject of copulation and sex would not then be a subject surrounded by shame and embarrassment. It would be an act of מצוה performance no different from that of putting on phylacteries, and would be performed publicly without shame or embarrassment. An act which is not inspired, at least partially, by the evil urge is not something associated with shame or embarrassment. Now that Adam and Eve had sinned, the act became associated with shame. Jacob, who is described as the "beauty," i.e. the spiritual level of an Adam before sin, began to repair the damage caused through Adam's sin. This is the significance of the oft repeated slogan that "his bed was pure." It means that Jacob only sprouted זרע קודש, "holy seed." Jacob never experienced impurity through the emission of semen for any purpose other than procreation. He was able to say of Reuben his first born, who was conceived when Jacob was at least 84 years old, ראובן בכורי אתה כחי וראשית אוני, "Reuben you are my firstborn, my strength and the first of my vigor" (Genesis 49, 2). Jacob's principal firstborn was Joseph, however, since when he cohabited with Leah, he was under the impression that it was Rachel, the wife he worked for for seven years. This is the reason he could deprive Reuben of his rights as a firstborn and transfer that birthright to Joseph. As a result, it was no more than fair that Joseph's children would receive a double share in the land of Israel, that Menasseh and Ephraim were each considered a tribe. The spiritual identity of Jacob and Joseph is even more evident when we consider Joseph's experience with the wife of Potiphar. Joseph maintained the purity displayed by his father in all matters sexual when he resisted the seduction of Mrs. Potiphar. [He cited as the only reason that it would be a sin against G–d and against her husband. Ed.] It is a well known fact that the צדיק, the righteous individual, is the foundation, יסוד of the world. The emanation ברית העליון, is the source of the תפארת, the covenant emanating in the "highest" regions, a term familiar to students of the Kabbalah. It is a direct continuation of the forces activated in the emanation, תפארת, the emanation which mirrors the attribute of Jacob.

A Midrashic approach: The reason that the verse שמע ישראל is written here after the Ten Commandments is to teach the people that when G’d used the attribute אנכי when introducing Himself at the beginning of the Ten Commandments, He referred to this אחדות of His, His uniqueness. Rabbi Nathan used the Ten Commandments (the text) to counter the claim of the heretics who believe that there are two separate and independent domains of authority in the universe. When the Lord stood at Mount Sinai and began the decalogue with the words “I am the Lord your G’d who has taken you out of Egypt,” this was equivalent to a challenge. Who dared oppose G’d at that time? Seeing that this verse שמע ישראל introduces our declaration of G’d’s Uniqueness, Moses saw fit to commence numerous verses in the Book of Deuteronomy with the words שמע ישראל. Some samples of such verses are found in Deut. 9,1; 20,3; 27,9. There are many others. We read in the Midrash (Devarim Rabbah Lieberman edition page 66) that the words שמע ישראל recall the time when Yaakov was worried that may be one of his sons was not whole-hearted in his loyalty to Hashem and he called in his sons and confronted them on the issue by saying ושמעו אל ישראל אביכם, (Genesis 49,2). What he meant was: “listen to the One whom your father Israel serves, i.e. to G’d.” Upon hearing this, the sons replied in unison שמע ישראל ה’ אלו-הינו ה’ אחד. Ever since the Jewish people have adopted the declaration made by the 12 sons of Yaakov as one of abiding faith in G’d also their own declaration of faith, pronounced every day. The formula has been amended to read: “שמע ישראל אשר במערת המכפלה ה’ אלו-הינו ה’ אחד “hear O Israel who is buried in the cave of Machpelah the Lord our G’d, the Lord is One.” (Compare Devarim Rabbah Lieberman edition page 67). Our sages also commented in Devarim Rabbah (Lieberman edition page 77) that when the people had stood at Mount Sinai they had vowed נעשה ונשמע, “we will do and we will listen.” Once they had made the golden calf Moses said to them that seeing they had already reneged on the first half of their undertaking they should at least honor the second part, i.e. the נשמע, by reaffirming their faith in the one and only G’d by saying the שמע ישראל on a daily basis. This matter can best be illustrated by a parable. A king betrothed a wife by giving her two 2 pearls. When she lost one he said to her: “safeguard the remaining one.” Thus far Midrash Rabbah.

Gather around so I can tell you what will happen to you in days to come. Assemble and listen, sons of Jacob; listen to your father Israel. (Gen. 49:1–2)

Come together and listen, sons of Yaakov; listen to [accept chastisement from] Yisrael, your father.

Gather yourselves together and hear, ye sons of Jakob, and receive instruction from Israel your father.

Be very careful what you say [in the morning, before praying]. Our Sages were strict even regarding permissible words, such as greeting someone before prayer, (Berachos 14a.) because this can also cause a blemish. It is known that the world was created with thought, speech and action. The first level is thought. Speech is an offshoot of thought, and action an offshoot of speech. When a person rises each morning, he is also a new creation, as the verse says: “They are new every morning” (Lamentations 3:23). If his first words are mundane (and all the more so, if they are forbidden (Such as profanity, gossip or slander.) ), everything he says later will be influenced by them, even his prayers and Torah studies. Because just as speech follows from thought, so the second word follows from the first. This is similar to the teaching of the Zohar (Zohar 3:83a.) and the Arizal on the obligation of siblings to honor the firstborn. (The Arizal writes that just as children are obligated to respect their parents, so must they respect their firstborn sibling. For the firstborn represents the initial creative act of the parents, from which all subsequent births draw their vitality. Thus, Jacob said about Reuben: “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might and the beginning of my strength…” (Genesis 49:3).) The firstborn takes the main portion, whereas all other siblings are like offshoots from him. In our case too, one must be very careful to sanctify and purify his first words and thoughts, and attach them to holiness, so that all subsequent words should follow them. Then, when he starts to pray, amidst the joy of having fulfilled the mitzvah of sanctifying his speech and thoughts, his words will surely be answered. Kesser Shem Tov, 20b

But Yaakov, who safeguarded his brit —as (Genesis 49:3), “the first of my manhood”—merited a voice. This is as in (ibid. 27:22), “The voice is the voice of Yaakov.”

This is likewise the aspect of “Open your mouth for the mute,” which in turn brings about the aspect of unbinding the mouth of the barren. These words, which had been repressed inside them for so long because they were deaf and mute, now emerge, and they do so with great strength, in the aspect of “Strong warriors, O’Sei (makers of) His word” (Psalms 103:20). And this strength reaches the reproductive organs, the aspect of “my strength and the first fruit of my vigor” (Genesis 49:3). That is, the generation’s God-trusting people, who are the aspect of the reproductive organs, receive this strength, in the aspect of “But they who put their hope in God will renew their strength” (Isaiah 40:31). This is why the kidneys are called “trusters,” since the kidneys are reproductive organs.

“Reuven shall live and not die; and let his men be numbered.” (Devarim, 33:6) With this blessing Moshe Rabeynu healed the blessing that Yaakov had withheld from him before his death. Corresponding to what Yaakov said (Bereshit, 49:3), “the excellency [or ‘excess’] of strength,” meaning that he had taken the tekufut (unbridled strength) and simcha (joy) of the heart away from him, Moshe Rabeynu blessed him by saying, “Reuven shall live,” meaning that he should have vivacity, joy, and tekifut in his heart. Corresponding to “the excellency [or ‘excess’] of dignity,” Moshe blessed him by saying, “let his men be numbered.” This is because increase comes from exaltation, for if there was no exaltation of one over another, and each one were similar to his fellow in his understanding, there would be no possibility of increase for they would be equal. Thus it says (Sanhedrin, 89a), “no two prophets prophesize in the same way.” Yet since one’s life is not the same as another’s life, from this power, we find states of increase. Therefore one is exalted over another, and therefore he blessed him by saying, “let his men be numbered,” which teaches of a healing for what Yaakov said, “the excellency [or ‘excess’] of dignity.”

This is because in those days it was customary to review each lesson one hundred times, as, indeed, illustrated in the Gemara, ibid., by the example taken from the market, where donkey drivers used to hire themselves out at a rate of ten parasangs ( Persian miles.) for a zuz, but for eleven parasangs charged two zuzim, because that exceeded their customary practice. For the same reason, the 101st revision, which is beyond the normal practice to which the student had been accustomed since childhood, is considered equivalent to all the previous one hundred times put together, and even surpassing them in endurance and effort, hence entitling him to be called “one who serves G–d.” For in order to change his habitual nature, he must arouse the love of G–d by means of meditation in his mind on the greatness of G–d in order to gain mastery over the nature that is in the left part [of the heart], which is full of blood of the animal soul originating in the kelipah, from where his nature comes. This is a perfect service for a benoni.

Moreover, their union is even of a higher and profounder order than the union of the Light of the En Sof, blessed is He, with the upper worlds, since the Supernal Will is actually manifest in the soul and its garments when they are engaged in the Torah, because it is identical with the Torah, while all the supernal worlds receive their vitality from the light and life that are derived from the Torah, which is His will and wisdom, blessed be He, as it is written, “You have made them all with wisdom.” ( Psalms 104:24.) Thus, His wisdom, i.e., the Torah, is above them all, and it is identical with His will, blessed be He, which is described as “encompassing” all worlds, i.e., that aspect which cannot clothe itself within the worlds, but animates and illuminates in a transcending and encompassing manner. ( Further discussion on the immanent and transcending aspects of the Divine emanation will be found in chs. 41, 46, 48, and 51.) Yet, it [this very light] does clothe itself in the human soul and its garments in a truly manifest form, when the person occupies himself with the words of the Torah, even though he does not perceive it… ( Cf. Megillah 3a.) [—this is what enables him to endure it, because he does not perceive it; it is otherwise, however, in the case of the upper spheres ( …where there is no such obscurity as in the physical world.) ].

The quality of this repentance will be stronger and more intense, from the depth of the heart, and likewise the joy of the soul will be with an added measure of light and joy, when he will reflect in his heart with knowledge and understanding to console himself from his distress and sorrow, saying, as above: “Truly and without a doubt…”—“but it was not I who created myself. Why, then, has G–d done such a thing, to cause a portion of His light, blessed be He, which fills and encompasses all worlds, and before Whom everything is of no account, to descend and to be clothed in a ‘serpent’s skin’ and in a fetid drop? It cannot be otherwise than that this descent is for the purpose of an ascent—to raise up to G–d the whole vital animal soul, which is of the kelipat nogah and all her ‘garments,’ namely her faculties of thought, speech, and action, through their being enclothed in the act, speech, and thought of the Torah.” [As for the meaning of this ascent—how this is the ultimate purpose of the creation of the world—it will be later explained at length.] ( Chs. 35, 36, 37.) “If this is so, there is one thing for me to do, and this will be my sole aim all the days of my earthly life, to fully occupy therein the life of my spirit and soul, as is written, ‘To You, L–rd, I lift my soul,’ ( Psalms 25:1.) that is to say, to bind my thought and speech with His thought and speech, blessed be He, which are the very laws which have been set before us, and likewise my action—in the performance of the commandments.”

Clearly, the purpose of the hishtalshelut of the worlds and their descent, degree by degree, is not for the sake of the higher worlds, because for them this is a descent from the light of His Countenance, blessed be He. But the ultimate purpose [of creation] is this lowest world, for such was His will, blessed be He, that He shall have satisfaction when the sitra achara is subdued and the darkness is turned to light, so that the Divine light of the En Sof, blessed is He, shall shine forth in the place of the darkness and sitra achara throughout this world, all the more strongly and intensely, with the excellence of light emerging from darkness, than its effulgence in the higher worlds, where it shines through “garments” and in concealment of the Countenance, which screen and conceal the light of the En Sof, blessed is He, in order that they should not dissolve out of existence.

The world of Atzilut, however, is beyond the intelligence, comprehension, and understanding of a created intellect, because the chochmah, binah, and daat of the En Sof, blessed is He, are united with it therein in perfect unity, a profound and wonderful unity which infinitely excels, in degree and form, that which is found in the world of Beriah, for in the latter they descended to give light by means of tzimtzum, so that created intellects should be able to receive from them chabad (chochmah, binah, daat), to know G–d and to understand and apprehend something of the light of the En Sof, blessed is He, to the extent possible for created intellects which are limited and finite, without their being dissolved in their existence and ceasing completely to exist as created beings, only to revert to their source and root, namely, G–dliness itself.

At the time the First Temple stood, in which the Ark and Tables [of the Decalogue] were housed in the Holy of Holies, the Shechinah, i.e., malchut d’Atzilut, that is, the aspect of the “revealed” light of the En Sof, blessed is He, dwelled there and was clothed in the Ten Commandments, far higher and stronger, and with a greater and mightier revelation, than its revelation in the shrines of the Holy of Holies above in the upper worlds. For the Ten Commandments are the all-embracing principles of the whole Torah, which comes from the chochmah ilaah (higher wisdom) ( Zohar II:85a; 121a.) that is far higher than the world of manifestation. In order to engrave them on material tablets of stone it (the Shechinah) did not descend degree by degree, parallel to the order of descent of the worlds down to this material world. For this material world functions through the garment of material nature, while the Tables [of the Decalogue] are “The work of G–d, and the writing is the writing of G–d,” ( Exodus 32:16.) beyond the nature of this material world which is derived from the effulgence of the Shechinah in the shrine of the Holy of Holies of Asiyah (“Action”), whence issues light and vitality to the world of Asiyah, in which this our world also is contained.

In fact, their nurture is granted them with even greater emphasis and force, (A play on Genesis 49:3.) as explained in Zohar, Pekudei. Every benevolence and vitality granted mortal man while he commits evil in the eyes of G–d, in deed or speech, or by musing on sin…all issues to him from the chambers of the sitra achara described there in the Zohar.

However, this (The limited amount for charity.) applies only to one who observes the Torah and does not stray from it right or left, even as much as a hair’s breadth. But he who has strayed from the path, Heaven forfend, whereas he has perverted his way [thus causing deficiencies in the kodesh ha’elyon, (Cf. Zohar III:66a; also, II:85b, 155b, 162b, and III:16b; et passim.—קדש העליון (Supreme Holiness) refers to the Supreme chochmah; see Zohar II:121a; Likkutei Amarim, Part I, ch. 19. See also below, Epistle 17, note 34.) that is, he has diminished his value as regards the efflux he could have elicited from the aspect of His Divinity and the radiation from the light of the En Sof, blessed is He, by observing the Torah and fulfilling her as behooves (Cf. Iggeret Hateshuvah, ch. 1.) ]—such perversion cannot be rectified save by an efflux of the Supreme light which transcends the worlds and does not vest itself in them. This is what is called chesed ilaah, and rav chesed, because it radiates and extends in a state of infinitude without limit and measure [whereas it is not contracted within the worlds but is in a state of encompassing over them, from aloft, from the peak of all rungs to the end…]. Now, when man draws it downward through his deeds and the arousal from below, this Supreme light will then radiate and expand within the worlds and rectify all perversions and deficiencies caused in the kodesh ha’eylon, renewing their light and goodness with exceeding uplifting and strength on the level of a truly new light. That is why they said that “In the place where penitents stand….” (In the place where penitents stand, not even the perfectly righteous can stand (Berachot 34b) because the penitents elicit the supreme light in greater strength and measure than the righteous. See Zohar I:39a and III:16b. Cf. also above, Epistle 8, note 23.)

However, the express form of mitzvatecha refers to the precept of charity, which is truly the mitzvah of the L–rd, which the Holy One, blessed is He, Himself, in all His majesty, performs at all times by animating the worlds, and will do so in the future with exceeding uplifting and force. (Par. Genesis 49:3.) And thus it is written: (Genesis 18:19.) “And they shall observe the way of the L–rd, to do tzedakah….” (See Zohar III:113b.) Metaphorically speaking, like a road on which one goes from one city to another, (Tzedakah is called the “way of the L–rd” because it is like a roadway that enables man to travel from one place to another.) so, too, charity is a capacity for a manifestation and radiation of the light of the En Sof, blessed is He, which encompasses all worlds, (The or sovev, or or makif; see above, Epistle 3, note 12.) so that in the future, at the Resurrection of the Dead, it will radiate, and become manifest, even to this world, through the arousal from below as an expression of charity and gratuitous kindness, [with an uplifting and force infinitely exceeding the state of manifestation of the radiation in the upper and lower Gardens of Eden]. For in the future all the souls of the tzaddikim, and of the Tannaim and the prophets that are now in the Higher Garden of Eden, at the peak of levels, will become vested in their bodies, and they will arise at the time of the resurrection to derive pleasure from the splendor of the Shechinah.

On Shabbat and the Festivals, however, all the businessmen, too, have the time and opportunity to prolong their prayers with the devotion of their heart and soul to the L–rd. Moreover, theirs is the duty to do so with exceeding uplifting and abundant strength, as stated in Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, (Section 290:2 (glosses of R. Moses Isserles).) and as it is written in the Torah of Moses: (Exodus 20:9, 10.) “Six days you shall work…and the seventh day is a Shabbat to the L–rd your G–d,” stating expressly that (Shabbat) is wholly to the L–rd. (See Rabbi Schneur Zalman, Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 290:5.) On a Shabbat or Festival, therefore, they too can descend before the Ark, according to lot or by assent of the majority, as I wrote last year.

Now, this manifestation in their mind and heart with an exceeding uplifting and abundant strength (Par. Genesis 49:3.) occurs at the time of prayer, as explained elsewhere.

And though every soul of Israel needs to be reincarnated in order to fulfill all the 613 commandments, (Tikkunei Zohar 70 (132a) (in the light of ibid., p. 131), and R. Chaim Vital, Shaar Hamitzvot, Foreword; see also Shaar Hagilgulim 11; et passim.—See further on this subject: Sefer Habahir 38 (193); Zohar II:100a ff; Zohar Chadash 59a. Cf. also R. Menasseh ben Israel, Nishmat Chaim 4:6 ff.) even so, this special care with a particular mitzvah is necessary only for the sake of an increase, and prudence, and additional zeal—with exceeding uplifting and strength, doubly and manifold, surpassing the zeal for the other commandments. And that is what he meant when he said “With what was he more careful?” (The following interpretation of this Talmudic passage by the author (which he received from his master, R. Dov Ber, the Maggid of Mezeritch, who in turn heard it from the Baal Shem Tov) will clarify this passage: “Every soul has a particular precept and a particular attribute which it needs to perform and develop. That is the meaning of what R. Yosef asked R. Yosef the son of Rabbah: ‘With what was your father more heedful (zahir)?’ After all, one is not to sit and evaluate the commandments of the Torah! But R. Yosef asked ‘in what was your father more zahir: in what precept did he have an illumination’ (taking zahir as an idiom of zohar—to shine; to brighten); not that he observed this precept only, but that the fulfillment of the precept of Tzitzit—with great care—gave him power and vitality in the observance of the other precepts.” See Sefer Hasichot—5700, p. 22; Sefer Hamaamarim 5708, p. 240, and the marginal notes by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, R. Menachem M. Schneerson, ad loc. Cf. Maimonides, Commentary on the Mishnah, Makkot 3:16. Etz Chaim 49:5.)

וראשית אוני, “and the first product of my virility.” Even though we have a tradition that a woman never conceives as a result of the first time she has engaged in sexual intercourse, it is possible to achieve such conception by means of what is called: מעיכה, “squeezing,” in the Talmud tractate Yevamot, folio 34.[It is quite difficult to accept this interpretation as the Torah makes plain that Leah did not get pregnant from the first time she slept with Yaakov, seeing that in Genesis 29,31 it states clearly that G-d helped her get pregnant when He observed that Yaakov “hated” her. Clearly this was not before the first night. Ed.]

כחי וראשית אוני יתר שאת, “my might and first fruit of my virility, exceeding in rank;” Yaakov refers to what Reuven would have been entitled to, i.e. an extra share in the inheritance as a result of being the first born. ...

The word אוני refers to financial strength. As in Hoseah 12,9: מצאתי און לי, “I have become rich!”

The meaning of the word שאת is as in לשאת, “bearing,” self assured posture.

ראובן בכורי אתה, Reuven you, who are my firstborn,” and who should have received a double share of my inheritance; and you who should also have shouldered the yoke of being the priest among your siblings, and from whom eventually the first King of the Israelites should have been crowned, (in accordance with Chronicles II 21,3) “and the title of Royalty he gave to Yehoram for he was the firstborn,” you will not enjoy all this as it has been transferred to Joseph, and the priesthood to Levi, and the Royalty to Yehudah, all because you have been as unstable as water, as a kettle that boils over and spills its contents.” (Compare Chronicles I 5,1) As a result, the only privilege a firstborn enjoys that you still possess is the hollow title of having been the firstborn of my sons. In this respect you are comparable to water, the first physical element in the universe. You are the original, (oldest) of the people that make up the Israelite nation, the 12 tribes.” Water is insubstantial; it cannot be poured out completely, as opposed to something dry which can be emptied without the loss of any part of it. In the Talmud, tractate Shabbat folio 55, where the meaning of the word פחז in our verse is discussed by different scholars, [there is a lengthy debate about what constituted the sin of a number of illustrious people such as Reuven, the sons of High Priest Eli, Solomon, Yoash, Pinchos, David, King Yoshia, and others Ed.] each offering a different opinion; the conclusion arrived at is that the scholars of the Mishnah agreed to disagree. The common denominator of their discussion is that the text describing their respective sins cannot be understood at its face value but is a metaphor describing a character weakness on the occasion. (B’reshit Rabbah 99,6)

REUBEN, THOU ART MY FIRST-BORN, MY MIGHT, AND THE FIRST-FRUITS OF MY STRENGTH. My might was first seen in thee. The first-born is called the first of one’s strength. We find an identical expression in And smote all the first-born in Egypt, The first-fruits of their strength in the tents of Ham (Ps. 78:51).

THE EXCELLENCY OF DIGNITY. You were suited by virtue of being first-born for the advantage of being exalted above all your brothers. (I.E. translates yeter se’et (the excellency of dignity) as the advantage (yeter) of rank (se’et) and interprets accordingly. It should be noted that se’et comes from the root nun, sin, alef, meaning raised up or exalted.)

AND THE EXCELLENCY OF POWER. This means the same as The excellency of dignity. It is prophetic style to repeat the same idea in different words. (I.E. translates our line: The advantage of rank / the advantage of power. The first in rank has dominion over those below him, hence power is parallel to rank and the advantage of power means the same as the advantage of rank. Modem scholars refer to this as synonymous parallelism. The latter is a feature of Biblical poetry.) The meaning of oz is power.

Unstable as water. You lost the kingship because a ruler must be levelheaded. You have gone up your father’s bed. You lost the priesthood because you caused the Divine Presence to depart from your father’s bed and the Holy Temple is the “bed” of our heavenly Father. You profaned. You wished to prevent me from fathering more children so that your inheritance would not be reduced; therefore you have forfeited the extra portion of the firstborn.

ראובן בכרי אתה, "Reuben, you are my firstborn, etc.," What news did Jacob convey to us with this statement? What did Jacob mean when he described Reuben as "my strength and the first of my vigor?" Although Bereshit Rabbah 98,4 mentions that Jacob meant to say that whereas he had not emitted a drop of semen until he married at 84 years of age, Reuben had not been able to contain himself, we still need to know why Jacob mentioned this at this time. Furthermore, why did he appear to repeat himself by describing Reuben as 1) "my strength," and 2) "the first of my vigor?" Another difficulty in this verse is the expression יתר שאת ויתר עז. Whereas the Midrash we have just referred to understands the word שאת as a reference to the Priesthood whereas the word עז is a reference to Royalty, we need to know why Jacob did not mention that as a firstborn Reuben was entitled to two portions in the inheritance seeing that he did dwell on details of the birthright. Onkelos does refer to this by saying that Jacob meant that Reuben should have been entitled to three shares of the inheritance. Another enigmatic statement in this verse (4) is the expression פחז כמים אל־תותר, "unstable as water, you have lost your advantage;" Rashi comments that Reuben lost his advantage as a firstborn because of his instability, the instability being that he defiled Jacob's bed in the incident with Bilhah (35,22). This still does not tell us why Jacob could not have merely said אל תותר, without describing Reuben as פחז כמים. After all, Reuben's instability was only an additional way of describing his sin. All we needed to know to justify that Reuben was deprived of his privileges as the firstborn was the fact that he had committed a sin against his father. Why did Jacob phrase Reuben's sin in the plural, i.e. "your father's beds?" Why did Jacob create the impression that Reuben had committed two wrongs when he said: אז חללת, "at that time you defiled," as if Reuben had also defiled his bed at a different time? It gives the impression that the defilement Jacob speaks about did not occur at the time Reuben mounted his father's bed. If that is so we are entitled to know what precisely Jacob is talking about. On the other hand, if mounting his father's bed was defiling it he should have said so in unmistakable terms.

There are people who display a strong tendency towards evil, a tendency which intensifies as they grow up, whereas others can control their evil urges with ease and are able to repent and find their way back to innocence with relative ease. Such tendencies are the result of the composition of their respective life-force at the time of conception. The holy thoughts and aspirations of the parents at the time of marital intercourse determine to a large degree the natural tendencies which we will observe in their offspring. If a parent concentrated on physical gratification at the time he engaged in procreation, he cannot be surprised if he transmitted tendencies of the desire to fulfil himself sexually to his offspring. If at the time the father indulged in marital relations with his wife he fantasized about some other woman's body, he cannot be surprised if his offspring develops adulterous or promiscuous tendencies. [This concept is not dissimilar to present-day theories about the genetic material injected into the sperm determining the quality of the body. In this case we speak about "moral" genetical material. Ed.] We have an interesting story about this in the Eyn Yaakov on Berachot 10. King Chiskiyah had failed to marry having seen with his mental eye that his offspring would not be worthy. He fell sick, and Isaiah told him to make his last will and testament as he was going to die. When he challenged the prophet why death at such an early age had been decreed upon him the prophet accused him of failing to fulfil the first commandment of the Torah, to procreate. He did not accept Chiskiyah's reason for not marrying and told him that the worthiness of his children was G'd's concern, whereas his only concern should have been to keep G'd's commandment. In the course of the conversation Chiskiyah suggested to Isaiah that he should give him his daughter in marriage and that perhaps their combined merits would suffice to produce worthy children. After refusing initially, Isaiah agreed in the end. The result was that Chiskiyah produced two idol-worshipping sons Menashe and Ravshakeh. Menashe and Ravshakeh may have been born with idolatrous tendencies due to thoughts which their father had entertained at the time he begat them. If one observes a person who has always conducted himself in the most pious manner commit an obvious sin, one must assume that he was not aware that he committed such a sin. Our argument that the various manifestations of spirituality we encounter contain both positive and negative elements is best proven by the tree of knowledge. The fact that G'd planted that tree within גן עדן is proof that it contained positive elements. G'd's garden is certainly not a place in which He had planted evil incarnate. Bereshit Rabbah 21, claims that if only Adam had waited till nightfall before eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge he could have used the juice to proclaim the sanctification of the Sabbath with it. [I have not found this in the section of the Midrash quoted. I presume this is based on the prohibition applying only "on the day you eat from it," as opposed to "the night you eat from it," etc. Ed.] This is in accordance with the view expressed in Sanhedrin 70 that the tree of knowledge was the grapevine.

In view of all the above you are bound to ask how it was possible that sainted patriarchs such as Abraham and Isaac could have fathered such sons as Ishmael and Esau respectively? The answer is that they carried within themselves residual evil bequeathed to them by their forefather Terach who was an idol worshiper. When Abraham was born he contained elements of such tendencies. Abraham was able to suppress and isolate such tendencies by dint of his character; the residue of such suppressed tendencies resurfaced in Ishmael, however. Nonetheless Abraham was not yet totally free from the residual evil tendencies bequeathed to him by his father so that even Isaac was born with them. Isaac, in turn, suppressed them and isolated them by means of his enthusiastic pursuit of holiness. He was so successful in this regard that our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 63,8 state that Esau had to be born first so that by absorbing the residue of negative spiritual input remaining from earlier ancestors, Jacob could emerge free from such taint.

Let us now examine what happened when Jacob married. Since he was born without negative spiritual residue, why did he produce a Reuben who demonstrated some negative traits? This could only have been due to Jacob's thoughts at the time he conceived Reuben not having been perfect. Jacob's purity of thought and his deed were not perfectly matched at that moment. Our sages in Nedarim 20 list nine categories of children who are spiritually defective from the time of their conception; one of these categories is the child of a man who has two wives and who at the time of marital relations believed that he was in bed with his other wife. Although Jacob's situation was different in that he had every reason to believe that he was in bed with Rachel, the objective fact was that he did not have the correct thoughts at the time. This is proven by the fact that Reuben later became guilty of a misdemeanour involving his father's bed, something that not one of the other eleven sons of Jacob ever became guilty of. Even Joseph who was exposed to sexual harassment of a very intense nature did not succumb. While it is true that the Talmud in Shabbat 55 states that if someone accuses Reuben of having committed a transgression such a person is in error, this referred merely to the legal aspect of the matter, not to its moral implications.

As to Yehudah sleeping with Tamar- something which suggests something less than 100% chaste behaviour by a son of Jacob- there are two answers. 1) First of all, he had no idea that she was his daughter-in-law; 2) the fact that an angel arranged things in such a way that he was actually acting under some kind of duress as explained by our sages in Makkot 23 on Genesis 38,26. The word ממני in that verse is understood by our sages as referring to a heavenly voice which claimed that the whole incident had been engineered by heaven. Since we do not have an allusion to such heavenly intervention in the case of Reuben, we are entitled to blame him for his act.

I have seen a comment by the outstanding scholar Rabbi Yehudah Rosenis in his volume Parshat D'rachim in which he comes to the defence of Reuben claiming that the status of Bilhah was that of a woman who had been seduced by his father Jacob, something he derives from her description as "his father's concubine." This means that Bilhah had never been betrothed to Jacob; l cannot agree with this. I am convinced that Jacob acquired Bilhah by betrothing her to him in the traditional manner as l have explained at the appropriate place (Genesis 30,3). As to the term "concubine" used by the Torah in 35,22, perhaps that was what Reuben thought. He was in error, however, and that may have accounted for his conduct. Alternatively, the Torah hinted at the reason that Reuben disturbed his father's bed. He argued that not only had Jacob down-graded his mother Leah during Rachel's lifetime, the fact that he slept primarily in Bilhah's tent now that Rachel was dead was an even greater insult to his mother. Her place had now been usurped by a mere concubine. The facts of the matter are that Bilhah had always been a proper wife of Jacob; this is why the Torah describes Reuben's action as equivalent to having slept with one of Jacob's wives.

Having said all this we understand the words of the Zohar according to which the cause of the problem was that Jacob had thought of fathering his firstborn son Joseph at the time he was sleeping with Leah. This is precisely what Ezra had in mind when he described Reuben's losing his birthright in the Book of Chronicles I 5,1. Had Jacob been thinking of Leah at the time he slept with her, Reuben would never have been capable of the deed ascribed to him.

We are now able to explain the various verses beautifully. When Jacob was about to deprive Reuben of his birthright he was poignantly aware that if one of his sons had displayed such a moral weakness he had to look for the source of that weakness in something he himself had been guilty of. The cause was, as we explained, that the father had bequeathed to his son some spiritual values be they positive or negative. Inasmuch as Reuben's sin consisted of a sexual aberration, Jacob was anxious to distance himself from the accusation that he was a contributory cause to Reuben's behaviour. He was afraid that in his heart Reuben would accuse his father of being the cause that he was capable of such a mistake. This is why he said first: "Reuben you are my firstborn." People who are guilty of adulterous behaviour fall into 3 categories. 1) They commit adultery and as a result father children who are morally inferior. 2) They commit adultery but do not cause their partner to become pregnant. Such intercourse can again be subdivided into several categories such as intercourse with a married woman which fortuitously does not result in that woman becoming pregnant. Alternatively, the adulterous male engages in intercourse with another male, or he ejaculates outside his female partner. Finally, he might commit the "act" only in an erotic dream at night, accidentally. 3) A person arouses himself by means of erotic thoughts. All of the afore-mentioned are degrees of actions which are abhorrent to G'd. Jacob referred to all three alternatives by saying to Reuben: "my firstborn," "my strength," "my vigor." When he said בכודי אתה, "you are my firstborn," he meant that he had not fathered any child prior to Reuben. Neither had he slept with a woman without benefit of betrothal and marriage certificate as this also would not have been appropriate. He then continued to say כחי, "my strength," meaning that he had not emitted sperm previous to that occasion. When he continued: ראשית אוני, "the first of my strength," he meant that he had never done anything that could be subsumed under any of the headings of adulterous behaviour we have listed.

When Jacob said כחי וראשית אוני, he also hinted that Reuben was the result of the first drop of semen he had ever ejaculated. This is an indication that Jacob had not slept with a virgin, as a virgin could not have become pregnant from her first intercourse. Instead, Jacob had removed the hymen with his finger in order not to let a single drop of his semen go to waste deliberately. This was a further indication that his physical passion did not dominate him and that he did what he did as a sacred duty only. As a result, Reuben had absolutely no reason to blame Jacob's past conduct for any of his own shortcomings. Jacob told Reuben all this not in order to boast about his piety and self-control but in order to be sure that Reuben did not suspect him of being implicated in any way in his having defiled his father's bed.

Jacob added the words יתר שאת ויתר עז as an allusion to the double portion of his father's inheritance that the firstborn is entitled to. Jacob had referred to this when he said: "you are my firstborn." On the other hand, there are other distinctions such as the priesthood and royalty which are not necessarily tied to being the firstborn. There are occasions when such honours are bestowed on people who are not firstborn. Reuben had also forfeited the chance to receive such honours.

Jacob may also have been telling Reuben that the honours of priesthood and Royalty which he would have been entitled to more than any other firstborn and which far outweighed other hereditary advantages of the firstborn he had also forfeited by his behaviour.

Before commencing to explain these verses we need to understand why Jacob did not honour the Torah's commandment of not showing preference (in terms of inheritance) to the firstborn son of the wife he loved when the true firstborn was the son of the wife he hated (Deut. 21,16)? Jacob treated Joseph the firstborn son of his beloved wife Rachel, as entitled to the privileges that are accorded to the son of the wife he hated when the latter had been born earlier. The question also arises whether the patriarchs were obligated to accept the norms of the Torah, seeing that the Torah did not become the law of Israel until the revelation at Mount Sinai. After all, we find that Jacob married two sisters while both were alive, something that contravenes Torah law. Abraham too did not perform circumcision on himself until he was advanced in years whereas Torah law stipulates circumcision on the eighth day or as soon as possible thereafter. We can find numerous other instances of the patriarchs not acting in accordance with Torah law. In view of the two examples we have quoted about the patriarchs not complying with what became Torah law thereafter, the whole question of why Jacob treated Joseph as his firstborn seems irrelevant. I have found that Nachmanides (Genesis 26,5) explains that the reason Jacob did marry two sisters while both were alive was that he was not in the Holy Land at the time. His words do not sound convincing. Who told Jacob that Torah legislation applied only within the boundaries of ארץ ישראל? The fact is that the commandments which the patriarchs did not observe apply equally in ארץ ישראל and outside it.

Up until this point Jacob dealt with the fact that he himself had not been at fault in the matter. From this point on Jacob proceeds to list the reasons that Reuben forfeited the privileges which come with being a firstborn. He deals with the distinctions Reuben has forfeited as well as with the roots of the mistake he committed.

I believe that the patriarchs received the Torah from Shem who in turn had received it from Noach; Noach had received it from Chanoch who had received it from Adam himself. Adam, of course, had received the Torah from G'd. This is based on Job 28,27: "Then He saw and told, etc.,…and He said to Adam." Zohar 1,199 attributes the revelation of Torah laws to Adam as the basis of G'd instructing him how to work and preserve the גן עדן. I have explained this in connection with Genesis 2,15. At that time Adam (and the patriarchs subsequently) were only commanded seven laws on pain of death. These laws are the ones commonly known as the Noachide laws, those applicable to mankind as a whole. All the other commandments which G'd revealed to Adam had only one purpose, namely to enable man to accumulate reward if he observed them. If he failed to observe those laws he was not liable to punishment. This situation continued until G'd revealed Himself to the Jewish people at Mount Sinai.

The patriarchs made a point of observing all these commandments as an expression of their love for G'd. This is what G'd had told Isaac in Genesis 26,5. Yuma 28 states that Abraham not only observed all the commandments of the Torah but even such Rabbinic ordinances as Eyruv Tavshilim. No doubt Abraham instructed his children in these matters as he wanted them to qualify for the reward in store for those who observed all these commandments. Whenever the patriarchs observed that by not observing one of these commandments they would achieve something important immediately, they decided to opt for the immediate benefit. This is what happened when Jacob decided to marry Rachel in addition to Leah. He wanted to have children by Rachel, i.e. that at least some of the tribes should be her offspring. Jacob was especially entitled to do so since he was a prophet and acted in accordance with instructions received from G'd directly. We can understand this better when comparing what Maimonides wrote in chapter 9 of his Hilchot Yesodey Torah. He states that if a properly accredited prophet instructs the Jewish people to violate one of the Torah's commandments on a temporary basis, he is to be obeyed. Maimonides quotes the incident when Elijah rebuilt a private altar and sacrificed on it on Mount Carmel as a case in point. The same applied to Jacob's having married two sisters. According to Bereshit Rabbah 85,8, an angel exploited Yehudah's desire to have sexual intercourse by guiding him to Tamar, thereby ensuring that the kings who would come out of him had a matriarch who was both of suitable ancestry and of high moral calibre. At any rate, there are instances when it was obviously preferable not to apply the strictures that would become anchored in law at a later time in Jewish history.

According to what we have said so far we must assume that the fact that Jacob used Reuben's misdeameanour to deprive him of the privileges which come with the birthright was quite legal, halachically speaking. Alternatively, Jacob had received instructions from G'd directly concerning this. We have all of this spelled out in Chronicles I 5,1 where the fact that Reuben was deprived of his birthright because he had mounted his father's bed is stated clearly, although it also states that though Ephrayim and Menashe became the new firstborns, they did not replace Reuben as the titular first-born.

It is still not clear why the birthright was not given to Yehudah instead of to Joseph or any of the other older brothers. The Zohar on Vayishlach page 176 explains this. "At the time when Jacob slept with Leah (the first night of his marriage), he thought only about Rachel all the time since he was under the impression that he was sleeping with and impregnating Rachel. Restoring the birthright to Joseph was no more than an example of Jacob's original intention being fulfilled."

Whereas this explained why Jacob gave the birthright to Joseph once he took it away from Reuben, why did the Torah have to mention that Reuben had defiled Jacob's bed? The birthright would have belonged to Joseph anyways. [I confess I have great difficulty with this Zohar because Leah was not impregnated on the first night of her marriage; when Reuben was conceived, eventually, Jacob was well aware that he was sleeping with Leah. If he had pined after Rachel knowing that he was sleeping with Leah this would have been most inappropriate. Ed.] In order to answer our problem we must remember that all the manifestations of spirituality in the world are divided into three categories. One category of spirituality is sacred, holy. A second category is secular; the third category of spirituality is evil. Each one of these categories produces "offsprings" corresponding to its nature. The category of holy spirituality produces offspring which is good, provides eternal bliss, and it strives for abstract intelligence, etc. The category of secular spirituality is characterised by its interest in the consumption of that which is aestethically pleasing, and that which provides enjoyment for the senses. The third category of spirituality is characterised by its interest in idolising every abomination. Its adherents commit every sin in the book. They steal, cheat, deceive, and consume mostly forbidden foods. They engage in illicit sex and indulge only in gratifying their lust, etc. These three categories between them comprise every human being, the good ones, the secular oriented ones, and the evil ones.

Inasmuch as the Jewish people belong to the holy category of spirituality, G'd has commanded them not to taste i.e. absorb things which characterise evil, be it in the form of food or drink, speech or thought, or even perceptions that are of a visual, aural or of an olfactory nature. Prohibited foods (i.e. the sense of taste) comprise such things as eating living tissue, eating unclean animals, eating reptiles and insects or diseased animals, or even animals which died a natural death. Forbidden drink includes the consumption of wine designated for idolatrous purposes, wine made from grapes of vines which are less than four years old, etc. Forbidden speech includes lying, slander, coarse language, character assassination, etc. Forbidden thoughts include the study of idolatry with a view to practicing it, fantasies of an erotic nature, considering oneself superior to others, pride, etc. Forbidden use of one's vision include examining a woman's physical beauty, as elaborated on in the Zohar Kedoshim page 83. Forbidden sounds include listening to women sing, etc. Forbidden smells and fragrances include forbidden smells such as the incense offered in pagan rites. In all these matters there are secular as well as sacred elements. G'd decreed that it was mandatory to observe the sacred elements whereas it was permitted to take advantage of the secular elements. Whenever a person associates himself with one of either of these elements by making use of them, his soul forms some kind of attachment with the root underlying such element be it positive or negative.

Seeing that this is so even a pure soul is subject to some degree of contamination when its owner gets involved in one of the secular elements. As a result, such a person (body as well as soul) will experience a process of afflictions either in this world or by the soul alone in the Hereafter to cleanse him of that contamination. This is the mystical dimension of the "laundry" mentioned in Shabbat 152 where the soiled souls are described as being handed over to the "washer" after death before they can take their seat at the king's table. During the period the "clothes" are being washed their owners are incarcerated. You should appreciate that once a forbidden category of spirituality has made contact with a person, that person's soul in turn develops a yearning for that particular category of the forbidden. The attraction between them is mutual. When a soul (personality) has become infected with the impurity represented by adultery, such a soul will begin to develop a yearning for this kind of impurity. The same holds true of all other categories of the forbidden. A person's desire to partake of evil increases in direct proportion to the quantity of evil he has absorbed and the frequency with which he has done so. On the other hand, a person's path to saintliness is similarly accelerated in proportion to the efforts he makes to distance himself from evil and to embrace only what is sacred and holy. The rule one must remember is that there is nothing in this world which does not contain elements of either negative or positive spirituality. Our only yardstick for knowing what contains negative spirituality is that which is forbidden by the Torah. In his volume Sefer Hayashar chapter 9, Rabbeynu Tam writes that when examining a number of personalities (נפש) as to their inherent tendencies, one will find that some people have absolutely no inclinations to commit adultery whereas others have. The difference is accounted for by the owners of these respective personalities having absorbed negative spirituality. Once a sufficient amount of such evil has been absorbed it is almost impossible for that personality to hate evil sufficiently for that hatred to be of assistance in combating evil tendencies. This is the mystical dimension of what we are taught in Sukkah 52 that man possesses a relatively small organ (male organ) whose demands grow in proportion to the freedom one grants it to satisfy its desire and which becomes progressively more satiated in proportion to the frequency with which it is denied its desire.

ראובן בכורי אתה, “Reuven you are my first-born.” As a first-born Reuven was entitled to three advantages over his younger brothers. He was entitled to all the privileges normally accruing to the first-born; he was entitled to be the family priest; and he was entitled to a position of authority including Royalty if and when his family would develop into a nation. He lost all three parts of what would have accrued to him by reason of his being the biological first-born due to his sin. He lost the ordinary privileges of being a first-born as Yaakov gave those privileges to Joseph. He lost the priesthood to Levi, and he lost his status as potential king of the Jewish people to Yehudah. This is the deeper meaning of Yaakov saying (verse 4) “water-like, impetuously-you cannot be foremost.” The expression פחז is used in that sense by our sages in Shabbat 88 where they quote a Gentile referring to the Israelites saying to G’d at Mount Sinai: “we shall do and we shall hear,“ ”you are still an impetuous nation referring with your mouth to matters your ears have not heard yet.” Yaakov referred to the priesthood when he said יתר שאת, “foremost in rank.” Yaakov referred to the eventual status of Royalty when he said יתר עז, “foremost in power.” The expression עז denoting such power is found in Samuel I 2,10 ויתן עז למלכו as well as in Psalms 99,4 ועז מלך משפט אהב, “Mighty king who loves justice.”

ראובן בכורי אתה; Yaakov repeated this theme a second and a third time when he continued: כחי, וראשית אוני. The reason was that theoretically, Reuven was entitled to three advantages. 1) birthright; 2) priesthood, as every firstborn in each family was automatically what the כהן would be after the sin of the golden calf when that privilege was transferred to the tribe of Levite who had not participated in that sin. 3) the position of political head of the nation, known as מלכות in the language of our sages.

יתר שאת, this expression encompasses both the birthright and the priesthood, both of which are primarily a description of an aristocratic social standing. ויתר עז, a reference to the political power, Royalty. Kings need to excel in this fortitude, toughness described by the word עוז. We find the expression used in that sense in Samuel I 2,10 ויתן עוז למלכו, “He will give power to His king.” Yaakov is reminding Reuven: “you would have enjoyed all these advantages over your brothers if you had not become guilty of a great sin.” This is why he continued with פחז כמים, you were precipitous as water in not restraining your biological urges which led you to mount the couch of your father. You did not stop to consider what a sin with far ranging effects you would make yourself guilty of by your lack of self control.

אל תותר, you will no longer enjoy any advantage over your brothers.

REUBEN MY FIRSTBORN THOU ART. (This is the order of the Hebrew words: Reuven b’chori atah. Ramban will transpose the order of the words for the purpose of deriving the meaning of the verse.) The sequence of this verse is, “Reuben, thou art my firstborn, my might, and the first-fruits of my strength, the excellence of majesty, and the excellence of power,” and its purport is as follows: “You are the first-born of my might and the first-fruits of my strength when I was the excellence of majesty (se’eith) and position” — the expression being similar to that found in the verses: Shall not his excellency (‘se’eitho’) make you afraid? (Job 13:11.) When he raiseth himself up (‘mise’eitho’) the mighty are afraid, (Ibid., 41:17.) ‘mise’eitho’ meaning ascendancy and power — “and when I was at the height of strength (oz) for war” — the expression being similar to that found in the verses: And He will give strength (‘oz’) unto His king; (I Samuel 2:10.) And the strength (‘ve’izuz’) of battle. (Isaiah 42:25.)

כחי וראשית אוני יתר שאת ויתר עז, although it sounds as if Yaakov is describing more than one facet of Reuven, it is a single statement incorporating what writers call “poetic license.” כחי, my power, my economic might; We find the word און as also referring to money, i.e. economic power in Hoseah,12,9 אך עשרתי, מצאתי און לי, ”I have become rich, I have gotten power.” Also in Job 20,10 the word און appears in the sense of economic power, וידיו תשבנה אונו, “his own hands must give back his wealth.”

What Yaakov is referring to is that although Reuven as the first-born was entitled to a double portion of his father’s estate, his conduct resulted in his forfeiting this advantage and forfeiting his chance of being the leader among his brothers. פחז כמים, having been unstable like water, you will no longer enjoy your excellence, i.e. יתר שאת, neither the rights of the first-born nor the claim to be king over the tribes.

וראשית אוני THE BEGINNING OF MY VIGOR — That is the first drop [of semen], as he had not experienced a seminal emission from all of his days [until that time] (Genesis Rabbah 98:4).

אוני means MY VIGOR, as (Hosea 12:9) “I have gained me (און) strength”; (Isaiah 40:26) “by the greatness of His (אונים) might”; (Isaiah 5:29) “and to him that hath no (אונים) might Ho increaseth strength”.

יתר שאת SUPERIORITY IN DIGNITY — Since you were the first-born it was proper that you should be superior to your brothers by being endowed with the priesthood. This term שאת “lifting up” alludes to the נשיאות כפים the raising of the hands when the priests pronounce the benediction (cf. Onkelos).

ויתר עז SUPERIORITY IN POWER — meaning in royal rank, as is meant by עז in (1 Samuel 2:10) “And he will give strength (עז) unto His king”. And what caused you to lose all these?

יתר שאת ויתר עז, פחז כמים אל תותר; you are as unstable as water; you will therefore not enjoy an advantage over your brothers, the advantage which would have consisted of יתר שאת, enhanced social position and the entitlement to the firstborn’s extra share in the inheritance as well as the status of priesthood. Even though you are biologically, ראשית אוני, and as such would have been entitled to privileges involving an extra share in my inheritance, (based on Deuteronomy 21,17) as well as

יתר עז enhanced political clout by supplying the kings of the Jewish nation from your tribe, you have forfeited all this by having displayed character weakness. (compare Chronicles II 21,3 where the claim to the throne by Yehoram was based on his being the firstborn).

He had never had a nocturnal emission. [Rashi knows this] because אוני is redundant, for it is already written כחי, and אוני and כחי have the same meaning as Rashi explains. [Question:] A woman cannot conceive from her first act of relations. [So how could Reuvein the son of Leah, have been conceived from Yaakov’s first drop? The answer is:] Perhaps Leah had been deflowered by a piece of wood. Re’m answers: She had deflowered herself with her finger. There are other answers; see there. Nachalas Yaakov writes: If not for what they wrote, I would explain that Leah did not actually conceive from the first drop. Rather, all of Yaakov’s drops were for [the purpose of conceiving] Reuvein, as Yaakov never had a nocturnal emission due to improper thoughts. See what he says there.

Jacob’s first few blessings follow his sons’ order of age. Reuben, you are my firstborn, my strength and the first of my potency; as the eldest, you were born when my strength was at its greatest. Therefore, you should have merited greater honor and greater power and ruled over your brothers. 11

ראובן בכורי אתה, “Reuven you are my firstborn, etc.” Yaakov meant to imply that due to his being the biologically first born, he should normally have been accorded a preferential rank, as is customary for firstborns, such as being the family’s priest, as well as its leader in secular matters. However, on account of the unfortunate incident in Genesis 35,22, he had disqualified himself for such preferential treatment. When he demonstrated an inability to control his biological urges, something Yaakov compares to the unstoppable tendency of water to flow downhill, he proved unfit for the task normally allotted to firstborns in those days. An alternate explanation of the line בכורי אתה כחי וראשית אוני יתר שאת, is: “you were my firstborn as long as you were reminiscent of the first product of my virility. At that time you possessed the advantage known as יתר שאת, the word meaning the same as in Job 13,11 הלא שאתו תבעת אתכם, “will not his height terrify you, etc?” The expression ויתר עוז refers to superior physical power, such as is useful in battle. You possessed this advantage only as long as you fulfilled the function of the firstborn. Since this task has been transferred to Joseph, you no longer possess it, as elaborated on by Rashi. You forfeited your advantages.

“Reuben, you are my firstborn” [49:3]. He called Reuben first and said. You are my first drop of seed, since Jacob did not see his seed until he slept with Leah and she became pregnant the first night from the drop of seed. (Rashi, Genesis, 49:3.)

“Exceeding in rank and exceeding in honor” [49:3]. You are certainly deserving that you should have more than your brothers; the birthright, the priesthood, and the kingship. (Ibid.) Toldot Yizhak writes here that he was worthy to have these three things because he was the firstborn, the first drop. Therefore, it was just that he should be a priest who takes the first part of everything, whether the tithe, terumah, or challah and the first part of the sacrifices, because he was born from the strength of Jacob. That is to say, he was still strong. He rolled a large stone by himself that many people used to gather before they could move the stone from its place. Jacob rolled the stone by himself. He married Leah at that time and had Reuben with her. Reuben was born when Jacob was at his strongest. Therefore, it was just that he should have the kingship, since a king must be strong. That is to say, the king must have a strong heart so that he could wage war with his enemies. Jacob said to Reuben: you are worthy of these three things, the birthright of the firstborn, the priesthood, and the kingship. Why don’t you have the kingship? It is because you were quick with your anger, like water that flows quickly. That is to say, you are not worthy to have the kingship because you get angry. A king must do everything with deliberation and must seek advice from his advisors. That is why he is called king. This shows he must have compassion and must seek advice about what he should do. This is also why you should not have the birthright, because you disturbed your father’s bed with Bilhah, so that Jacob should not have more children with her. You, Reuben, are firstborn and would inherit more if there would be fewer children. Therefore, you should not have the birthright, measure for measure. The third is that Reuben desecrated the bed of Jacob, where the Shekhinah used to appear. Therefore, you are unworthy, Reuben, to have the priesthood. You desecrated and made the bed unholy. Therefore, you must also remain unholy. (Toldot Yizhak, Genesis, 49:3.) Hizkuni writes. From the time that Reuben did his deed with Bilhah, Jacob did not sleep with Bilhah. “My couch he mounted” [49:4]. Jacob said to his children. See what Reuben did. He went on my bed where I used to sleep. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 49:4.)

[3] Another interpretation: "And the Lord saw that Leah was hated. And it shall be that the man [Jacob] will have two wives (Deuteronomy 21:15). Rabbi Berechiah said: This man is Jacob, as it is stated, 'And Jacob was a simple man' (Genesis 25:27). There were two wives, Rachel and Leah. The one [Leah] was beloved, as it is written, 'this is Leah' (Deuteronomy 21:15), and the other was unloved, as it is written, 'And the Lord saw that Leah was unloved' (Genesis 29:31). Both of them bore children for him [Jacob]. What Leah accomplished, Rachel did not accomplish, and what Rachel accomplished, Leah did not accomplish. Leah gave birth to kings, and Rachel gave birth to kings. Leah gave birth to prophets, and Rachel gave birth to prophets. Leah gave birth to judges, and Rachel gave birth to judges. And the firstborn son was to the unloved [Leah], this is Reuben, as it is stated, 'And Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben' (Genesis 29:32). And on the day that he [Jacob] bestowed his blessing, at the time when Jacob sought to depart from the world, he called his sons [to him]... 'he shall not give the son of the beloved [Rachel] precedence over the son of the unloved [Leah],' to Joseph [he gave this blessing], 'why should he [Reuben] be granted the rights of the firstborn?' (Deuteronomy 21:17) ["This is Reuben, as it is said, 'Reuben, you are my firstborn' (Genesis 49:3)]. Although I said that his impulsiveness was like water, do not withhold [praise] from him, for 'his bed is on high' (Genesis 49:4). What is 'on high'? When Moses comes, about whom it is written, 'And Moses went up' (Exodus 19:3), he will redeem you. Since Moses stood up and pleaded for him, as it is said, 'May Reuben live and not die' (Deuteronomy 33:6),. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, 'He shall live and not die,' [and thus] you [Reuben] are able to take two portions, as it is stated, 'For he [Reuben] should receive a double portion' (Deuteronomy 21:17). 'May Reuben live' - in this world; 'and not die' - in the World to Come. "For he is the beginning of my strength and so on. And it is written, 'my strength and the beginning of my might' (Genesis 49:3). Therefore, the Lord saw that Leah was hated."

Chapter (82) 83: Prophets [1] "I will assemble Jacob, all of you; I will bring together the remnant of Israel;. (Micah 2:12). Like it is said in scriptures: Assemble and listen, and complete [note: last word גומר doesn't exist in verse] (Genesis 49:2). Although the exact time of judgment day is unknown, I say to you that when you gather and assemble, at that moment you will be redeemed, as it is said, "I will surely gather all of you, O Jacob; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold, like a flock in its pasture, a noisy multitude of men" (Micah 2:12). "Reuben, you are my firstborn" (Genesis 49:3), I have not seen a blemish in you since I was born. "My might and the beginning of my strength" (same verse), since the day I was born I have been saying, "Perhaps Reuben will go up to the roof and die, or he will go down and fall." You were the beginning of my strength. "Excelling in dignity and excelling in power" (same verse), and because of the sin you committed, they took three crowns away from you and gave them to your brothers: the firstborn to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingdom to Judah. Otherwise, you would have been the firstborn. "Excelling in dignity," that is the priesthood, as it is said, "And Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things" (Exodus 28:38). "Excelling in power," I was worthy of purifying them, as it is written, "To cleanse and to sprinkle" (Leviticus 14:56). "Unstable as water" (Genesis 49:4), our rabbis have taught that three liquids are forbidden because of exposure: water, wine, and milk. If one finds exposed milk, water, or wine, they should be spilled out, just as you are unstable as water. Alternatively, "unstable" means that you acted recklessly, disgracefully, and insulted others. Just as the vessels in which liquids are poured out or stored become unusable, but the liquids themselves remain, so too you, because of your sin, should not remain. Another thing: is raging like water. Just as water purifies for everyone, so too will you purify your sins when the one who is saved from the water comes to give you blood, and who is this but Moses, as it is written, "She called his name Moses, for I drew him out of the water" (Exodus 2:10). And when does he give you blood? When you spread out your bed (Genesis 49:14), when he comes to ascend Mount Nebo, as it is written, "Let Reuben live and not die" (Deuteronomy 33:6). "Simeon and Levi are brothers" (Genesis 49:5), and not only were they brothers, but they became brothers to do justice, as it is said, "And two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, took each man his sword" (Genesis 34:25). Their weapons are instruments of violence (Genesis 49:5). The Greek language is their swords. Jacob said, "If these two tribes sit together, they will destroy the world. But I will scatter them, divide them among Jacob and disperse them among Israel" (Genesis 49:7). "Judah, your brothers will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies" (Genesis 49:8), referring to his killing of Esau. Similarly, Moses said, "His hands are his to contend with; you helped him against his foes" (Deuteronomy 33:7). "Judah, your lion's cub; from prey, my son, you have gone up" (Genesis 49:9), which is as you were named. So did your mother say, "This time I will thank God" (Genesis 29:35), and she praised God in the story of Tamar, and all the tribes praised her. "The sons of my concubine have risen against me" (Genesis 49:29), Tamar's tragedy, that she and her two sons were already doomed, as it says "they brought her out and burned her" (Genesis 38:24), but she confessed and saved herself and her two sons, just as Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were saved whole when they were thrown into the furnace. "He crouches like a lion, like a lioness--who dares to rouse him?" (Genesis 49:9), referring to David, the anointed one from you, as it says "whose heart is like that of a lion" (2 Samuel 17:10). "Forbidding the vine its fruit [and the donkey's colt to drink] (Genesis 49:11). This refers to the Messiah who will arise from you, as it is written, 'humble and riding on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey' (Zechariah 9:9). And to the flute and the finisher. Where are the Israelites forbidden and their sins atoned for? In the territory of Judah in Jerusalem. 'The scepter shall not depart from Judah' (Genesis 49:10) refers to the kingdom, 'nor a lawgiver' (ibid.) refers to the leader, 'until Shiloh comes' (ibid.) refers to the Messiah, 'and to him shall be the obedience of the people' (ibid.). 'And the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king' (Hosea 3:5), and similarly it says, 'and she ate and was satisfied, and left over' (Ruth 2:14). 'And she ate' refers to the leader, as it is written, 'and from among your brothers you shall appoint a leader' (Deuteronomy 17:15), 'and was satisfied' refers to the kingdom, and 'left over' refers to the leadership. Zebulun shall dwell by the seashore, and he shall be a haven for ships (Genesis 49:13)." "He who makes ships, goes forth and comes back and brings sufficiency to the tribe of Yissachar, who occupy themselves with Torah, as it is said, Yissachar is a strong-boned donkey, crouching among the sheepfolds. And he saw a resting place that was good, and the land that it was pleasant, and he inclined his shoulder to bear, and became a servant to tribute. (Genesis 49:14-15). Those who toil in Torah, as it is said, "And of the children of Yissachar, who had understanding of the times, to know what Yisrael ought to do; the heads of them were two hundred; and all their brothers were at their commandment." (1 Chronicles 12:33). This teaches that two hundred members of the Sanhedrin stood from the tribe of Yissachar, and all of them were with the power of Zebulun, who go out to the sea and bring them [Yissachar] what they need, as it is said, "Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out, and Yissachar, in your tents." (Deuteronomy 33:18)." "Dan will judge his people" (Genesis 49:16). This refers to rest. "Let Dan be a serpent" (ibid. v. 17) refers to Samson, who, just as a serpent bites on its own, so too Samson fought and killed on his own. Another interpretation is that just as a serpent doesn't die if it is bitten on its tail or belly, because it only dies if it is bitten on the head (as it says, "You will strike his head," Genesis 3:15), so too Samson, when he was bound with his hands and feet, and his strength was not known, as soon as his hair was cut, his strength left him (Judges 16:19). Yet, even so, he bit the heels of a horse and its rider fell backward (Genesis 49:17), as he grasped both pillars and brought the house down (Judges 16:29), and Jacob exclaimed, "I have waited for Your salvation, O Lord" (Genesis 49:18). "Gad, a troop shall tramp upon him" (ibid. v. 19) refers to Elijah, who crushed the gang of a certain ruler. "He shall provide the first part for himself" (ibid. v. 20) refers to Asher, whose land produces rich fruits and excellent oil, and he brings olive oil as an offering (ibid.). "Naphtali is a hind let loose" (ibid. v. 21) refers to all those who study the Torah and are beloved to the Almighty like deer, as it says, "A loving hind and a graceful doe" (Proverbs 5:19). "Joseph is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a fountain" (Genesis 49:22). When Pharaoh heard Joseph's interpretation of his dreams, he said that Joseph was wise and discerning (Genesis 41:39). "His eyes are darker than wine" (Genesis 49:12) refers to Joseph's children, whom the other tribes did not begrudge, and the children of Joseph say to Joshua, "We are a numerous people and God has blessed us until now" (Joshua 17:14). Joshua said to them, "This is what you say, and yet you are not afraid of the evil eye?" They replied, "Jacob our father already prayed for us that the evil eye should not rule over us, as it is said, 'Against me [Jacob] was the evil eye' (Genesis 49:27), and Benjamin is compared to a wolf that tears (Genesis 49:27). In the Temple, which was built within its borders, they would sacrifice there one lamb, etc. (Numbers 28:4). Once he blessed each person according to their needs, he made them into tribes, as it is said, 'These are the tribes of Israel' (Genesis 49:28). He said to them, "Behold, I have blessed you," as it is said, 'And this is what their father spoke to them and blessed them' (Genesis 49:28). A faithful man will come and seal my blessings, and who is this? It is Moses, as it is said, 'And this is the blessing with which Moses blessed' (Deuteronomy 33:1)."

“Who presented his offering… [Naḥshon, son of Aminadav, of the tribe of Judah]” – that is what is written: “God is known in Judah…” (Psalms 76:2). This is what the verse said: “That which the wise tell…” (Job 15:18), this is Judah, who confessed and said: “She is more righteous than I” (Genesis 38:26), and did not withhold the truth [about his actions with Tamar] from Jacob and from Shem. (This is a reference to Shem’s court. Tamar’s father, Shem son of Noah, was no longer alive, but his court continued to function.) Because he rescued Tamar and her twin sons from the inferno, as it is written [before he confessed]: “Judah said: Take her out and burn her” (Genesis 38:24); that is why Ḥananya, Mishael, and Azarya were rescued from the fiery furnace, as it is written: “Nebuchadnezzar spoke, saying: Blessed is the God of Shadrakh, Meshakh, and Aved Nego…and from me is issued a decree that any people, nation, or language [that says anything amiss against the God of Shadrakh, Meshakh, and Aved Nego will be rendered into pieces]…” (Daniel 3:28–29). That is why it says: “God is known in Judah…” Another matter, “God is known in Judah” – when Daniel descended into the lion’s den and was rescued, as it is written: “Then King Darius wrote to all the peoples, the nations…. A decree is issued before me, that in the entire dominion of my kingdom, men shall tremble [and fear before the God of Daniel]…. He rescues and delivers, and performs signs and wonders [in the heavens and on earth. He saved Daniel from the grasp of the lions]” (Daniel 6:26–28). That is, “God is known in Judah.” Why was Daniel rescued from the lions? It is because he prayed before the Holy One blessed be He, who is called “lion,” as it is written: “They will follow the Lord, He will roar like a lion” (Hosea 11:10). And Daniel is from the tribe of Judah, that is called “lion,” as it is stated: "Judah is a lion cub” (Genesis 49:9), and it is written: “Among them from the children of Judah were Daniel…” (Daniel 1:6). Let a Lion come and rescue a lion from the mouth of a lion. Alternatively, it is because he resembled the lions, as he is a lion; therefore, they did not harm him. Why was he not cast into the fiery furnace? It is because he was Nebuchadnezzar’s god, as it is written: “He prostrated himself to Daniel, and said for a meal offering and fragrances be poured to him” (Daniel 2:46). Alternatively, it is because he would have been burned, as it is written: “The idols of their gods you shall burn in fire” (Deuteronomy 7:25). Therefore, the Holy One blessed be He introduced into Darius’s heart that he should not cast him into the fiery furnace, so as to make known His might. Another matter, “God is known in Judah” – that is what is written: “Ephraim will become desolation [on the day of rebuke; among the tribes of Israel I proclaim certainties]” (Hosea 5:9). “Ephraim will become desolation,” in its plain sense; “on the day of rebuke,” just as it says: “It is a day of trouble, rebuke and execration” (Isaiah 37:3). “Among the tribes of Israel,” as I reside in their midst, as I dwell in their midst. “I proclaim certainties”; just as it says: “The testimony of the Lord is trustworthy” (Psalms 19:8). When the [ten] tribes were exiled, but Judah and Benjamin were not exiled, the nations of the world began saying: ‘He showed then favor because they were the residents of his residence and he did not exile them.’ When they were exiled, God announced that sin in the world: “The princes of Judah were like movers of boundaries; I will pour My ire like water upon them” (Hosea 5:10). That is, “God is known in Judah.” Another matter, “known in Judah,” just as it says: “If an army besieges me, my heart will not fear. [If war comes upon me, I will put my trust in this]” (Psalms 27:3). What is, “if war comes upon me, I will put my trust in this”? In what “this”? It is in what Moses said: “This for Judah, and he said: [Hear, Lord, the voice of Judah…and You will be a helper against his adversaries]” (Deuteronomy 33:7). “His name is great in Israel” (Psalms 76:2) – that is what is written: “Punishments are prepared for cynics, [and blows [mahalumot] for the back of fools]” (Proverbs 19:29). Punishments are for those who commit transgressions. This is analogous to one who was riding on an animal. If it does not stray, he will not strike it, but if it strays, he strikes it. So, the Holy One blessed be He said: “Punishments are prepared for cynics.” The Holy One blessed be He said: ‘Before I created Man, I prepared five rods for him: Spot, scab, bright spot, rash, and burn.’ Some say: Leprosy and scall. This corresponds to five “laws,” as it is stated: “This is the law for any leprous mark, and for a scall…and for the spot, for the scab, and for the bright spot” (Leviticus 14:54, 56). This is analogous to a bad slave who was being sold. An individual went to purchase him. He knew that he was bad. He brought chains and rods with him, so if he misbehaved, he could subjugate him with them. When he misbehaved, he brought the chains and chained him, and struck him with the rods. The slave said to him: ‘You knew from the outset that I am a bad slave. Why did you purchase me?’ He said to him: ‘Because I knew that you were bad in your conduct; therefore, I also prepared to bind you and to strike you, so that if you misbehaved, you would be struck with them.’ So, the Holy One blessed be He said: ‘Before I created Man, I knew him: “As the inclination of man's heart is evil from his youth”’ (Genesis 8:21). Woe to dough whose baker testifies in its regard that it is bad. That is why it is stated: “Punishments are prepared for cynics.” What is mahalumot? Three words, Rabbi Berekhya said. What are these? It is for the nations [ma lo mot]. (Meaning, ma - what are these severe punishments? lo mot - the letters that spell mot (mem, vav, tav) can also be read mavet, meaning death. Thus, the response to the question, ma, is lo mavet - the death is for them, not for you. ) Rabbi Avin said: This is analogous to a noblewoman who entered the palace and saw whips and rods and she was afraid. The residents of the palace said to her: ‘Fear not, these are for the slaves and the maidservant. You are here to eat, drink, and be honored.’ So, the congregation of Israel, when they heard the portions of curses and leprosy, they began to be afraid. Moses said to them: ‘These are for the idolaters. You are here to eat, drink, and engage in Torah study.’ “She is like the merchant ships, bringing her food from afar” (Proverbs 31:14). That is, “His name is great in Israel.” Another matter, “His name is great in Israel” – that is what is written: “For, from the rising of the sun to its setting, My name is great among the nations [and in every place burnt offerings and pure meal offerings [uninḥa] are burned [muktar], presented [mugash] to My name, for My name is great among the nations, said the Lord of hosts]” (Malachi 1:11). Is it so, that in every place they present incense and meal offering in the name of the Holy One blessed be He? It is, rather, that everywhere that Israel stands and recites the afternoon [minḥa] prayer, regarding that, it says minḥa in its plain sense. And it says: “It was at the time of offering up the afternoon offering that Elijah the prophet approached” (I Kings 18:36). (He prayed at the time of the afternoon offering.) “Presented [mugash],” this is the morning prayer, just as it says: “Abraham approached [vayigash]…” (Genesis 18:23), in prayer. (Genesis 19:27 states that Abraham went in the morning to the place where he had stood before God. From that verse we learn (Brachot 26b) that Abraham founded the morning service. Since the verse refers to the place in which he had stood before God, it is presumably referring to Genesis 18:23, where he is described as approaching God to plead for Sodom. The presumption is that this took place at the time of the regular prayer, namely, in the morning.) “Burned [muktar],” this is the evening prayer, just as it is stated: “Let my prayer stand as incense [ketoret] before You; [the lifting of my hands, an evening offering]” (Psalms 141:2). That is, “His name is great in Israel” – anywhere that Israel is standing there. That is why it is stated: “My name is great among the nations.” “God is known in Judah” – when he takes revenge against their enemies. Just as it says: “Egypt will become desolation and Edom will become a desolate wilderness, due to the villainy against the children of Judah…” (Joel 4:19). “I will cleanse; their blood I will not cleanse…” (Joel 4:21). That is, “God is known in Judah,” just as it says: “The Lord is known through the judgments He executes; [the wicked one is snared] in his handiwork…” (Psalms 9:17). “God is known in Judah” – Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Ilai said: When Israel stood at the sea, the tribes were deliberating with each other. This one says: ‘I will descend first,’ and this one says: ‘I will descend first.’ Naḥshon leapt into the waves of the sea and descended. In his regard, David said: “Rescue me, God, for the waters have come up to my soul” (Psalms 69:2). The Holy One blessed be He said to Moses: ‘My friend is sinking in the sea, and you are praying? “Speak to the children of Israel, and let them travel”’ (Exodus 14:15). That is, “God is known in Judah.” That is why the Holy One blessed be He exalted the name of Naḥshon in Israel, as he was privileged to present his offering first, as it is stated: “The one who presented his offering on the first day was [vayhi] [Naḥshon].” That is, “His name is great in Israel.”

“Take a census of…,” that is what is written: “He will not withdraw His eyes from the righteous…” (Job 36:7). The Holy One blessed be He does not withhold from them the realization of their ideal, as we found that Jacob coveted the birthright for the sake of Heaven, so he would be able to sacrifice. He purchased it from Esau with money and the Holy One blessed be He agreed with him, and He called him: “My son, My firstborn” (Exodus 4:22). He granted greatness to the firstborn so they would sacrifice before Him. That is, “He will not withdraw His eyes [einav] from the righteous” (Job 36:7). [Another explanation:] “Einav” is nothing other than in his place [taḥtav], just as it says: “And, behold, the mark maintained its appearance [be’einav]” (Leviticus 13:5). What is taḥtav? These are his children, just as it says: “In the wake of [taḥat] your fathers, your sons will be” (Psalms 45:17). “And kings upon the throne” (Job 36:7), as the Holy One blessed be He accorded honor to the firstborn, and it was fitting for them to take the kingdom, as it is stated: “But the kingdom he gave to Yehoram, because he was the firstborn” (II Chronicles 21:3). Likewise, regarding David it says: “As for Me, I will make him My firstborn, supreme over kings of the earth” (Psalms 89:28). That is, “and kings upon the throne.” “He has seated them forever” (Job 36:7), as they [the Israelite firstborns] would have been fit to take the priesthood and what the Levites perform, had they not sinned in the act of the calf. Initially, the firstborn would sacrifice, as it is stated: “He sent the young men of the children of Israel and they offered up burnt offerings [and they slaughtered feast-offerings of bulls to the Lord]” (Exodus 24:5). Likewise, Jacob said to Reuben: “Reuben, you are my firstborn…[greater in honor [se’et] and greater in power [az]]” (Genesis 49:3). Se’et, this is priesthood, just as it says: “Aaron raised his hands [vayisa] toward the people, and blessed them” (Leviticus 9:22). Az, this is kingdom, as it is stated: “He will give strength [oz] to His king” (I Samuel 2:10). Had Reuben not sinned in the act of Bilha, he would have been worthy to take priesthood and kingdom, because he was the firstborn.. From where is it derived that they were worthy for the service of the Levites? It is as you find that the common Levites entered in place of the firstborn of Israel, as it is stated: “You shall take the Levites for Me, I am the Lord, in place of all the firstborn among the children of Israel” (Numbers 3:41). That is, “he has seated them forever [lanetzach].” This is the status of the Levites that the firstborn were worthy to take, just as it says: “The Levites were counted from thirty years old and above…of these…” (I Chronicles 23:3–4). “To supervise [lenatzeach] the labor of the House of the Lord” (Ezra 3:8). Regarding the tribe of Levi, the verse said: “My eyes are on the faithful of the land; they will dwell [lashevet] with me” (Psalms 101:6). That is “He has seated them [vayoshivem] forever.” “They were exalted” (Job 36:7). Who caused the firstborn to lose this honor? It is because they exalted themselves and worshipped before the calf. Therefore, “if there are those bound in shackles [bezikim]” (Job 36:8), they were prohibited from sacrificing an item that is done in fire. ("An item that is done in fire" refers to a sacrifice. Zikim) is nothing other than fire, as it is stated: “Behold, all of you are igniters of fire, [lighters of sparks] [zikot]” (Isaiah 50:11). [“Or trapped in the pangs of poverty” (Job 36:8)], that each and every one of them is obligated to redeem himself with five silver shekels and give them to the Levites. We find regarding the firstborn of Israel that they descended from their prominence because of the act of the calf. But the firstborn of the Levites, who did not err regarding the calf, the priesthood was given to Aaron, who was the firstborn, and the rest of the firstborn Levites required neither redemption nor atonement, and merited Levite status with their brethren. Were a person to whisper to you: ‘Was Gershon not firstborn? Why did the verse give precedence to Kehat in taking a census, and only then counted Gershon?’ You, too, say to him: ‘Because [the family of] Kehat were the bearers of the Ark, which is of the most sacred order, and Aaron the priest, who was of the most sacred order, emerged from him, while Gershon was sacred. That is why the verse gave Kehat precedence. From where do you derive that Gershon did not lose his prominence because he was firstborn? It is as you find just as it is stated regarding Kehat: “Take a census of the sons of Kehat” (Numbers 4:2), so, it is stated regarding Gershon: “Take a census of the sons of Gershon [as well]” (Numbers 4:22). What is it that the verse stated: “As well”? It is so you will not say that it is for this that he counted the sons of Gershon second, because they are inferior to the sons of Kehat. No, rather, “as well” is written; that the sons of Gershon, too, were the equivalent of the sons of Kehat, but the verse gave them precedence here in deference to the Torah. But in other places, it gave precedence to Gershon over Kehat.

“Jacob called to his sons, and he said: Gather, and I will tell you what will befall you at the end of days. Assemble and hear, sons of Jacob, and listen to Israel your father” (Genesis 49:1–2). “Jacob called to his sons.” “The lot is cast in the bosom” (Proverbs 16:33) – this is the lottery of Yom Kippur. “And all of one’s judgment is from the Lord” (Proverbs 16:33) – to determine which will be for God and which will go to an uninhabitable land. Another matter: “The lot is cast in the bosom” – this is the lot of the tribes. (Their destiny as expressed in the blessings they received from Jacob. ) “And all of one’s judgment is from the Lord” – that the Holy One blessed be He agreed with him to give each and every one as befitting him. “Jacob called to his sons” – Rabbi Yudan and Rabbi Pinḥas: Rabbi Yudan said: Jacob called the Almighty to be with his sons. Rabbi Pinḥas said: He invited Him to his sons. (He invited Him [zimno] to share in his joy over the fact that all his sons had remained righteous (Matnot Kehuna). Alternatively, he asked God to be always available [mezuman] to come to his sons’ aid (Etz Yosef). ) Rabbi Avun said: He appointed Him steward for his sons. “He said: Gather ….” – gather from the land of Egypt and assemble in Rameses. Gather from the ten tribes and assemble to the tribe of Judah and Benjamin. He commanded them to act with deference to the tribe of Judah and Benjamin. Rabbi Aḥa said: Purify yourselves, just as it says: “They gathered themselves together…” (Nehemiah 12:28), “and they purified the chambers” (Nehemiah 13:9). The Rabbis say: He commanded them regarding dissension. He said to them: ‘You shall all be one assembly.’ That is what is written: “You, Son of man, take for you one piece of wood, and write on it: [For Judah] and for the children of Israel [his companions]” (Ezekiel 37:16) – it is written “his companion” (The term “his companions [ḥaverav]” is written without a vav, which would ordinarily be read “his companion [ḥavero],” even though in this instance it is traditionally pronounced in the plural, ḥaverav. ) – the children of Israel became a single group. Prepare yourselves for redemption. What is written thereafter? “I will render you one nation…” (see Ezekiel 37:22). “[I will tell you] what will befall you at the end of days” – Rabbi Simon said: He showed them the downfall of Gog, just as it says: “It will be at the end of days” (Ezekiel 38:16). Rabbi Yehuda said: He showed them the building of the Temple, just as it says: “It will be at the end of days that the mountain of the House of the Lord will be established” (Micah 4:1). The Rabbis said: He came to reveal the End, but it was concealed from him. Rabbi Yehuda in the name of Rabbi Elazar bar Avina: Two people, the End was revealed to them and was then concealed from them. They are Jacob and Daniel. Daniel – “But you, Daniel, obscure the matters and seal” (Daniel 12:4). Jacob – “what will befall you at the end of days.” “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my strength, and the first of my potency; greater honor and greater power” (Genesis 49:3). “Reuben, you are my firstborn” – this teaches that he came to reveal the End, but it was concealed from him. (He began with, “I will tell you what will befall you at the end of days,” and continued with, “Reuben you are my firstborn,” which does not pertain to the end of days. This shows that the events of the end of days were concealed from Jacob so that he would not reveal them. ) This is analogous to a king’s confidant who was passing from the world, and his sons were surrounding his bed. He said to them: ‘Come and I will reveal to you the secrets of the king.’ He lifted his eyes and gazed at the king. (He saw from the king’s expression that he did not want him to reveal the secrets. ) He said to them: ‘Be vigilant regarding the honor of the king.’ So, Jacob our patriarch lifted his eyes and saw the Divine Presence standing over him. He said to them: ‘Be vigilant regarding the honor of the Holy One blessed be He.’ The Rabbis said: So, the congregation of Koraḥ was sinking and descending, sinking and descending, until Hannah stood and prayed on their behalf: “The Lord puts to death and brings to life; He lowers to the netherworld and elevates” (I Samuel 2:6). (Just as the congregation of Koraḥ was ostracized until Hannah prayed on their behalf, so too, Reuben was ostracized until Moses restored him. Some commentaries write that this passage should not appear here, and belongs instead at the end of section 4 (see, e.g., Matnot Kehuna). )

“Reuben, you are my firstborn” – Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] would say [an interpretation] of this as praise and [an interpretation] as criticism. You are firstborn, and Esau is firstborn. “Esau went to the field to hunt game [to bring]” (Genesis 27:5) – if he found, fine; if not, “to bring” from what he stole or took by force. But you, “Reuben went during the days of wheat harvest [and found mandrakes in the field and brought them to his mother Leah]” (Genesis 30:14). (Reuven took mandrakes that were ownerless and not from what belonged to others (see Bereshit Rabba 72:2), unlike Esau.) “My strength, and the first of my potency” – these are the vanguard in the battle. “Greater honor and greater power” – “their faces were like the faces of lions” (I Chronicles 12:9). (This is written regarding the Gadites, but since the Gadites and Reubenites both formed the vanguard in the conquest of Canaan, it is true of the Reubenites as well (Matnot Kehuna). ) He would say [an interpretation] about this as criticism – “Reuben, you are my firstborn” – you are firstborn and I am firstborn. (Jacob bought the birthright from Esau.) I, at the age of eighty-four years old, had never seen a drop of seminal emission, (That is, until Jacob married Leah and fathered Reuben. The midrash assumes that Reuben was conceived the first time Jacob had relations with Leah. ) but you: “[Reuben] went and lay with Bilha” (Genesis 35:22). “My strength, and the first of my potency” – the first of my toil and the first of my travail. (He was the one with whom Jacob first experienced the travail of raising children.) “Greater honor and greater power” – the birthright was yours, the priesthood was yours, the kingship was yours, but now that you sinned, the birthright was given to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingship to Judah. Rabbi Aḥa said: The birthright was not yours. Is it not so that Jacob went to Laban only for Rachel? All the furrows that I plowed in your mother; was it not in Rachel that they should have been plowed? (This is a euphemism for marital relations. Reuben was conceived the first time Jacob had relations with Leah, when he thought she was Rachel, and therefore by right the firstborn should have been from Rachel (Nezer HaKodesh). ) Now, the birthright has returned to its owner. "Impetuous as water, you shall not excel; because you mounted your father's bed; then you desecrated, he who ascended my couch” (Genesis 49:4). “Impetuous as water, you shall not excel” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua: Rabbi Eliezer said: You were impetuous [paḥazta], you sinned [ḥatata], you engaged in harlotry [zanita]. (The Hebrew term for impetuous, paḥaz, is an acronym for paḥazta, ḥatata, zanita.) Rabbi Yehoshua said: You rebelled [parakta ol], you desecrated [ḥilalta] my couch, your evil inclination stirred [za] within you. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said: You trampled [pasata] the law, you forfeited [ḥavta] your birthright, you became a stranger [zar] vis-à-vis your gifts. They said: Even now, we still need the Moda’i. Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i came and explained: You shuddered [zata], you trembled [ḥaradta], the sin flew [paraḥ] from upon your head. (Reuben shuddered and trembled with remorse for his sin, and therefore was forgiven (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Pinḥas said: You acted like those impetuous ones who break their shins in the water. (They leap before they look.) “As water” – the Rabbis say: You sinned through water, (Water in the sense of liquid, a reference to semen.) let the one who was drawn from water come and draw you near: “May Reuben live and not die” (Deuteronomy 33:6). (This verse was stated by Moses, who was so called because he was drawn from the water (see Exodus 2:10). ) “As water” – just as water is released from place to place, so, you have been released. (Just as water flows, your sin has flowed away from you, i.e., you have been relieved of liability. Alternatively, the implication is: Your privileges have been taken from you (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says: One does not make a ritual bath of wine or of oil, but rather of water; so, you made yourself a ritual bath of water and you purified yourself in it. (Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i is of the opinion that Reuben sinned only in thought but not in deed, as he did not carry out his sinful thoughts. Therefore, his thoughts of sincere repentance restored him to a state of purity, as though he had immersed in a ritual bath (Etz Yosef). ) “You shall not excel [totar]” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said this: Nothing was relinquished [vitarta] for you. (You have not been absolved from punishment. This is derived from the fact that totar and vitarta are derived from the same root in Hebrew. ) Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says: There will be nothing remaining [vitaron] for you from your sin. “Because you mounted [alita]” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: Because you mounted in its plain sense. (They interpret the phrase “because you mounted your father’s bed” in the plain sense as indicating that Reuben literally sinned with Bilha. ) Rabbi Elazar said: Because you mounted [alita] (He interprets alita to mean “you elevated [he’eleita],” meaning that Reuben brought about benefit regarding his father’s bed. This occurred in the incident of the mandrakes, which led to the birth of Issachar.) – where? In the case of the mandrakes. “Your father’s bed [mishkevei avikha]” – Rabbi Berekhya said: It is not written here: Your father’s bed [mishkav] , but rather, “your father’s beds [mishkevei]” (The term mishkevei, generally translated “bed,” is actually a plural term, such that a literal translation would be “beds.” ) – the bed of Bilha and the bed of Zilpa. (Accordingly, not only did Reuben literally sin, but he did so with Zilpa as well as with Bilha. ) Rabbi Abbahu, and some say Rabbi Yaakov, in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyya Rabba, and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: We learned: One who is suspect in some matter neither judges in its regard nor testifies in its regard. (Mishna Bekhorot 4:10. ) Is it possible that he is destined to be one of the six tribes that were standing on Mount Eval and saying: “Cursed is one who lies with his father’s wife” (Deuteronomy 27:20), and he performed this very act? Rather, he was defending his mother’s honor. All the days that Rachel was alive, her bed was situated alongside the bed of Jacob our patriarch. When Rachel died, Jacob our patriarch took Bilha’s bed and placed it alongside his bed. [Reuben] said: Is it not enough that my mother was jealous during her sister’s lifetime, that she must be so even after her death? He rose and rearranged the beds. Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon disagrees with this and [says that] Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi [said] in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: This is analogous to one who was suspected of selling teruma as non-sacred produce. (Teruma, which could be eaten only by priests and the members of their households, and only in a state of ritual purity, would command a much cheaper price than non-sacred produce. ) They investigated him and inspected, but did not find any substance to these claims, and they appointed him in charge of setting prices in the marketplace. “Then you desecrated” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: “Then you desecrated” – in its plain sense. “Ascended” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: You ascended from your sin. Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i said: You ascended from your gifts. (Numerous commentaries suggest that the text should read that according to Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, “you ascended from your gifts,” meaning that due to his sin, Reuben lost out on the priestly gifts, and Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says, “you ascended from your sin,” meaning that Reuben repented and achieved atonement for his sin. ) The Rabbis say: I am neither distancing you nor drawing you near. Instead I am leaving you in loose abeyance until Moses, in whose regard it is written: “And Moses ascended to God” (Exodus 19:3), comes, and does with you what he perceives to be correct. When Moses came, he began to draw him near: “May Reuben live” (Deuteronomy 33:6). The Rabbis say: The same was true of the congregation of Koraḥ, . (See the end of section 2. )

“Jacob called to his sons, and he said: Gather, and I will tell you what will befall you at the end of days. Assemble and hear, sons of Jacob, and listen to Israel your father” (Genesis 49:1–2). Why did he call them? He sought to reveal to them the End. It is written: “He removes speech from the trusted, and takes the sense of elders” (Job 12:20). Who are the “trusted” and the “elders”? They are Isaac, Jacob, Aaron, and Moses. In Moses’s regard it is written: “In all My house he is trusted” (Numbers 12:7). Likewise, in Aaron’s regard: “The Torah of truth was in his mouth” (Malachi 2:6). But because they said: “Hear now, defiant ones” (Numbers 20:10), they were sentenced because of their speech – “therefore, you will not bring this assembly [into the land that I have given them]” (Numbers 20:12). That is, “He removes speech from the trusted.” (Here the midrash interprets the verse to mean: “He removes the trusted due to speech,” meaning that God removed Moses and Aaron from their projected positions of leading Israel into the land due to their sin involving speech. ) “And takes the sense of elders” – this is Isaac and Jacob. Isaac was fond of Esau, whom the Holy One blessed be He hated, and he said to him: “Prepare delicacies for me” (Genesis 27:4), and sought to bless him and reveal the End to him. What did the Holy One blessed be He do? He stripped him of his sense, and he did not know, (God removed the divine spirit from Isaac. ) but he began trembling, as it is stated: “Isaac was overcome [with very great trembling]” (Genesis 27:33). When he was unable to find what to say, he said: “Indeed he shall be blessed” (Genesis 27:33). Jacob, too, sought to reveal the End to his sons, as it is stated: “Gather, and I will tell you what will befall [you at the end of days]”; and the Holy One blessed be He concealed it from him, and he began saying: “Reuben, you are my firstborn” (Genesis 49:3). That is, “and takes the sense of elders.”

“Gather, and I will tell you” – he appointed them as elders, just as it is stated: “Gather to Me seventy men of the elders of Israel” (Numbers 11:16). “Gather” is stated, and “assemble and hear” is stated – he informed them that they would be exiled twice. “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my strength, and the first of my potency; greater honor and greater power. Impetuous as water, you shall not excel [totar]; because you mounted your father’s bed; then you desecrated, he who ascended my couch” (Genesis 49:3–4). “Reuben, you are my firstborn” – you are my firstborn, you are similar to me. I lived eighty years and did not see even one drop of semen. “My strength and the first of my potency” – you were my first drop. “Greater honor and greater power” – three crowns were in your possession: priesthood, kingship, and the birthright. Priesthood, as it is written: “Greater honor [se’et],” and se’et is nothing other than priesthood, as it is written: “Aaron lifted [vayisa] his hands” (Leviticus 9:22). Kingship, as it is written: “And greater power,” and power is nothing other than kingship, as it is written: “He will give strength to His king” (I Samuel 2:10). The birthright, as it is written: “Reuben, you are my firstborn.” And you lost them. What caused you [to lose them]? “Impetuous [paḥaz] as water, you shall not excel.” For what is it an acronym? Rabbi Eliezer says: You were impetuous [paḥazta], you cast [hishlakhta] (Although hishlakhta begins with a heh whereas paḥazta has a ḥet, since these sounds are produced in a similar way and sound similar, they are considered interchangeable for homiletical purposes (Etz Yosef; see Rabbi David Luria). ) the yoke from upon your neck, your evil inclination moved [za] against you. Rabbi Yehoshua says: You were impetuous [paḥazta], you sinned [ḥatata], you engaged in licentiousness [zanita]. Rabbi Levi said: Transpose paḥaz – you trembled [zata], you became anxious [ḥaradta], and the sin departed [paraḥ] from you. (He did not actually engage in relations with Bilha, and he repented even for the thought of doing so.) Alternatively, paḥaz – you trampled [pasata] the law, you profaned [ḥilalta] your birthright, you became a stranger [zar]. (The term stranger is used as a contrast to priesthood; a non-priest is known as a stranger [zar]. ) “As water” – what is “as water”? If a person pours a flask of water and it spills, nothing at all remains [mishtayer] in it, but if it was of oil or of honey, something would remain in it. That is why it says: “As water you shall not totar. “Because you mounted [alita] your father’s bed” – when you brought mandrakes and your mother was saying to her sister: “Was the taking of my husband insignificant” (Genesis 30:15), you caused my bed to be elevated [alita] and my couch to be desecrated. (This view interprets the term “mounted [alita]” to mean elevated, in a positive sense. When Reuben brought mandrakes to his mother (Genesis 30:14), Rachel asked for some of them. Leah responded: “Was the taking of my husband insignificant that you would take also of my son’s mandrakes?” and Rachel responded: “Therefore he will lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes” (Genesis 30:15). In this exchange, Leah was considered to have respected and elevated Jacob’s bed and Rachel was considered to have denigrated it (Etz Yosef; see Bereshit Rabba 98:4). ) Because you caused it to be desecrated, you will be a pariah until Moses, in whose regard it is written: “Moses ascended” (Exodus 19:3), will come and release you and draw you near. That is what is written: “May Reuben live” (Deuteronomy 33:6). (This was stated by Moses. )

(Gen. 49:3:) REUBEN, YOU ARE MY FIRST-BORN. One said < it was > to his discredit, and another said < it was > to his credit. To his discredit: He said to him: REUBEN, YOU ARE MY FIRST-BORN. (Gen. R. 98(99):4.) You are a first-born, and I am a firstborn. (By virtue of having bought Esau’s birthright.) R. Judah b. R. Shallum said: For eighty-four years Jacob never saw a < nocturnal > pollution. (Gen. R. 97, New Version, on 49:3 (= p. 1204 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); cf. Gen. R. 99 (another version):6 (= p. 1277 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); Tanh., Gen. 12:9; see also Gen. R. 68:5; Meg. 17a and Rashi, ad loc.) I am a first-born, and you are a first-born. (Gen. R. 98(99):4 explains that Reuben did not follow his father’s example, but (according to Gen. 35:22, 49:4) slept with his father’s concubine and thereby lost his birthright, his priesthood, and his right to kingship. See also below; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. 49:3; Tanh., Gen. 12:9.)

(Gen. 49:3, cont.:) MY MIGHT AND THE FIRST FRUIT OF MY STRENGTH, EXCELLING IN ELEVATION, in that the high priesthood had been designated for you, and there is no ELEVATION but the high priesthood. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 9:22): THEN AARON ELEVATED HIS HANDS TOWARD THE PEOPLE AND BLESSED THEM. (Gen. R. 99 (another version):6 (= p. 1277 in the Theodor-Albeck edition).)

(Gen. 49:3, cont.:) AND EXCELLING IN POWER, in that the kingship had been designated for you, and there is no power but kingship. Thus it is stated (in I Sam. 2:10): AND HE SHALL GIVE POWER TO HIS KING. And another said < it (i.e., Gen. 49:3) was > to his credit. REUBEN, YOU ARE MY FIRST-BORN. You are suitable for the birthright, even though you desecrated it. He had been filled with jealousy for his mother. (See Gen. R. 97, New Version, on 49:4 (= p. 1205 in the Theodor-Albeck edition)) Why? All the days that Rachel lived, Jacob's bed was with her. When she died, Jacob took his bed and put it with Bilhah. What did Reuben do? He became jealous for his mother. He pretended to be asleep on that bed so that Jacob would put his bed with Leah. (See Gen. R. 97, New Version, on 49:3 (= p. 1205 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); Gen. R. 98:4.) It therefore is praising (The root of this verb is similar to the Greek kalos, i.e., “beautifully.”) him (in Gen. 49:3): REUBEN, YOU ARE MY FIRST-BORN, MY MIGHT AND THE FIRST FRUIT OF MY STRENGTH. You were the first drop (of semen) that came out of me.

[Another interpretation (of Gen. 29:31): WHEN THE LORD SAW THAT LEAH WAS HATED.] This text is related (to Deut. 21:15-17): WHEN A MAN HAS TWO WIVES, < THE ONE BELOVED AND THE OTHER HATED, AND WHEN BOTH THE BELOVED AND THE HATED HAVE BORNE HIM SONS WITH THE FIRST-BORN BELONGING TO THE HATED WOMAN; THEN, ON THE DAY THAT HE WILLS HIS PROPERTY TO HIS SONS AS AN INHERITANCE, HE MAY NOT TREAT THE SON OF THE BELOVED AS THE FIRST-BORN IN PREFERENCE TO THE SON OF THE HATED WHEN HE IS THE FIRST-BORN. INSTEAD, HE SHALL RECOGNIZE THE FIRST-BORN SON OF THE HATED WOMAN BY GIVING HIM A DOUBLE PORTION SINCE HE IS THE FIRST FRUIT OF HIS STRENGTH >. < (Deut. 21:15:) WHEN A MAN HAS >: This is Jacob, as stated (in Gen. 25:27): JACOB WAS A PERFECT MAN. (Deut. 21:15, cont.:) TWO WIVES: Leah and Rachel. (Ibid., cont.:) THE ONE BELOVED, i.e., Rachel, as stated (in Gen. 29:30): AND HE ALSO LOVED RACHEL. (Deut. 21:15, cont.:) AND THE OTHER HATED: i.e., Leah, as stated (in Gen. 29:31): WHEN THE LORD SAW THAT LEAH WAS HATED. (Deut. 21:15, cont.:) AND WHEN BOTH THE BELOVED AND THE HATED HAVE BORNE HIM SONS, i.e., both of them bore for him. (The passage may interpret banot (“daughters”) as bonot (“builders”) who would build up a worthy lineages.) Moreover, what Leah produced Rachel produced. (Similarly Gen. R. 70:15.) Leah produced kings, and so did Rachel [produce kings. Leah produced prophets, and so did Rachel produce prophets]. Leah produced judges, and so did Rachel. It is therefore stated (in Deut. 21:15): AND WHEN < BOTH THE BELOVED AND THE HATED > HAVE BORNE HIM SONS. (Deut. 21:16:) THEN, ON THE DAY THAT HE WILLS < HIS PROPERTY > TO HIS SONS AS AN INHERITANCE. When the time had come for him to depart from the world, (according to Gen. 49:1): THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS. (Deut. 21:16, cont.:) HE MAY NOT TREAT THE SON OF THE BELOVED, < i.e., > Joseph, AS THE FIRST-BORN. Why? (Vs. 17:) INSTEAD, HE SHALL RECOGNIZE THE FIRST-BORN SON OF THE HATED WOMAN < BY GIVING HIM A DOUBLE PORTION >. This was Reuben, as stated (in Gen. 49:3): REUBEN, YOU ARE MY FIRST-BORN, < MY MIGHT AND THE FIRST FRUIT OF MY STRENGTH, EXCELLING IN ELEVATION AND EXCELLING IN POWER >. < Jacob gave this blessing >, even though he said to his shame (in vs. 4): UNSTABLE AS WATER, YOU SHALL NO LONGER EXCEL; < FOR YOU WENT UP TO YOUR FATHER'S BED, THEN DEFILED IT >. What is the meaning of (ibid., cont.) HE WENT UP TO MY COUCH. When Moses would come, about whom it is written (in Exod. 19:3): THEN MOSES WENT UP TO GOD, he would redeem him. As Moses stood < there >, he sought mercy for him. It is so stated (in Deut. 33:6): LET REUBEN LIVE. The Holy One said (ibid., cont.): AND LET HIM NOT DIE. It turns out that he gets {compensation in proportion to both of them} [a pardon (Gk.: demos (“common people”). This meaning of demos may be suggested by demotikos agon, a public festival with games in connection with which amnesties might be given. Cf. Lat.: dimissus.) from the mouth of both of them] (i.e., God and Moses). Thus it is stated (in Deut. 21:17): INSTEAD, HE SHALL RECOGNIZE THE FIRST-BORN [SON OF THE HATED WOMAN] BY GIVING HIM A DOUBLE PORTION. (Deut. 33:6:) LET REUBEN LIVE, AND LET HIM NOT DIE; < i.e., > LET REUBEN LIVE in this world, AND LET HIM NOT DIE in the world to come. Why? (Deut. 21:17:) SINCE HE IS THE FIRST FRUIT OF HIS STRENGTH. [It is also written (in Gen. 49:3): MY MIGHT AND THE FIRST FRUIT OF MY STRENGTH.]

Why did he say to them Gather yourselves together, assemble yourselves (Gen. 49:1–2)? He did so to let them realize that they would be exiled twice. After he had designated the elders among them, he began to rebuke them, saying: Reuben, thou art my firstborn (Gen. 49:3). From that very moment Israel merited reciting the Shema. Why? When Jacob was about to depart from this world, he reflected upon it and said: “My grandfather Abraham begot Isaac and Ishmael, and my father, Isaac, begot me and Esau; perhaps there is a blemish in my family.” When they heard this, they proclaimed in unison: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one (Deut. 6:4). Hence it is written: Hearken to Israel, thy father (Gen. 49:2).

Reuben, thou art My firstborn, My might and the first fruits of My strength; the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power. unstable as water, have not thou the excellency (Gen. 49:3–4). Thou art my firstborn. You are my firstborn, the product of the first drop of semen I produced in eighty years. (Cf. Genesis Rabbah 98:4, “in eighty-four years.”) In fact, I did not even experience nocturnal pollution before then. My firstborn. Are you like me? The excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power. Three crowns were available to you: priesthood, kingship, and the right of the firstborn. The excellency of dignity alludes to the priesthood, as is said: And Aaron lifted up his hands (Lev. 9:22); the excellency of power refers to kingship, as it is said: And he will give power unto his king (I Sam. 2:10); the birthright is indicated by the double portion he received, as is said: By giving him a double portion (Deut. 21:17). But you have lost them all. Why? Because you are as unstable as water, and therefore have not thou the excellency.

Jacob, when he said these words, may possibly have experienced a moment of divine inspiration about the need for the kingdom of Joseph to precede that of Yehudah. What plagued Jacob was 1) that he simultaneously foresaw that the kingdom of David would be split when Jerovam of the tribe of Joseph would command the allegiance of ten of the twelve tribes. At that time Yehudah and Benjamin alone would remain loyal to the house of David. This was one factor which led to the destruction of the first Temple; 2) because Jerovam erected the golden calves which the Ten Tribes worshiped. Later on, Israel committed many other grievous sins. Even the tribes of Yehudah and Benjamin were infected eventually, until this brought about their exile. During the second Temple the Hasmoneans appropriated the "crown" of Royalty which should have been Yehudah's. We have already quoted Nachmanides who explains how the ascent of the slave Herod to the throne in Jerusalem was a punishment for that error of the Hasmoneans, and became the beginning of the end of the second Temple which was eventually destroyed by the Romans.

If man and his wife had been able to maintain their state of innocence, the drop of semen from which a fetus develops would not be called a טפה סרוחה, an evil smelling drop. Instead, it would be called זרע קודש, holy seed. The subject of copulation and sex would not then be a subject surrounded by shame and embarrassment. It would be an act of מצוה performance no different from that of putting on phylacteries, and would be performed publicly without shame or embarrassment. An act which is not inspired, at least partially, by the evil urge is not something associated with shame or embarrassment. Now that Adam and Eve had sinned, the act became associated with shame. Jacob, who is described as the "beauty," i.e. the spiritual level of an Adam before sin, began to repair the damage caused through Adam's sin. This is the significance of the oft repeated slogan that "his bed was pure." It means that Jacob only sprouted זרע קודש, "holy seed." Jacob never experienced impurity through the emission of semen for any purpose other than procreation. He was able to say of Reuben his first born, who was conceived when Jacob was at least 84 years old, ראובן בכורי אתה כחי וראשית אוני, "Reuben you are my firstborn, my strength and the first of my vigor" (Genesis 49, 2). Jacob's principal firstborn was Joseph, however, since when he cohabited with Leah, he was under the impression that it was Rachel, the wife he worked for for seven years. This is the reason he could deprive Reuben of his rights as a firstborn and transfer that birthright to Joseph. As a result, it was no more than fair that Joseph's children would receive a double share in the land of Israel, that Menasseh and Ephraim were each considered a tribe. The spiritual identity of Jacob and Joseph is even more evident when we consider Joseph's experience with the wife of Potiphar. Joseph maintained the purity displayed by his father in all matters sexual when he resisted the seduction of Mrs. Potiphar. [He cited as the only reason that it would be a sin against G–d and against her husband. Ed.] It is a well known fact that the צדיק, the righteous individual, is the foundation, יסוד of the world. The emanation ברית העליון, is the source of the תפארת, the covenant emanating in the "highest" regions, a term familiar to students of the Kabbalah. It is a direct continuation of the forces activated in the emanation, תפארת, the emanation which mirrors the attribute of Jacob.

The word אנכי is the mystical dimension of אחד, since when you "square" the letters of the word אחד, the total equals the numerical value of אנכי. The calculation is as follows: you multiply each letter in the word אחד by itself, i.e. 1 by 1=1; +8 by 8=64; +4 by 4=16. This adds up to a total of 81. The word 81=אנכי. The conceptual common denominator between the two words is that just as G–d is unique, i.e. אחד, so Rebeccah as potential founder of the twelve tribes making up the people of Israel is unique. The letters in אחד can also be read as follows: "The nation Israel consisting of 8 tribes born by Jacob's major wives ח, and 4 tribes born by Jacob's minor wives ד, together form one nation, א-אחי. The word אנכי is equivalent to the numerical value of כסא, G–d's throne, where Jacob's likeness is inscribed. After Jacob had received assurances that he would be the founder of twelve tribes, and that these tribes would enjoy G–d's blessings and be the forerunners of the eventual redemption when G–d would be "walking in their midst," he exclaimed that he had absorbed this information and that he had now received the answer to what had troubled his mother when she had questioned the value of her existence, i.e. her אנכי. The Talmud Chulin 91 even describes the ascent and descent of the angels as motivated by their desire to compare the features of Jacob with the image engraved on the throne of G–d. The angels tried to cause Jacob trouble, when G–d intervened. This is the reason why the Torah says: "Here G–d stood on top of him."

There is an even stronger connection. The unusual phrase “first of [his father’s] strength” appears only twice in the Torah, here (“for he is the first of his father’s strength”) and in relation to Reuben, Leah’s firstborn: “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might and the first of my strength, first in rank and first in power” (Gen. 49:3).

And likewise, by spilling blood, are they the opposite of Yaakov. For we have not found anyone who was as much the opposite of spilling blood as Yaakov. And this is an amazing matter. For we say in Tractate Niddah (13a) in the chapter [entitled] Kol HaYad, "One who emits semen for naught is considered as though he sheds blood - as it is stated (Isaiah 57:5), 'You that inflame yourselves among the terebinths, under every leafy tree, those who squeeze (sochatei) the children!' Do not read it as 'sochatei'; rather, read it as 'shochatei (those who kill) the children.'" And since Yaakov was far from the spilling of blood, Yaakov did not see an inadvertent emission all of his days - as they, may their memory be blessed, expounded (Yevamot 76a) upon the verse (Genesis 49:3), "Reuven, you are my firstborn, my might, and the first of my strength." Even though this is beyond one's control, he was so far from the spilling of blood that no inadvertent emission - which is connected to formation - came from him. And all of this is known to those that understand, as Yaakov and Esav are opposites: Esav was called, "ruddy" (Genesis 25:25), and he was a man of blood (Rashi on Genesis 25:25); whereas life was with Yaakov. And hence Yaakov also never died (Taanit 5b), as is known to one who stood in the council of the holy ones. These things are all appropriate for the forefathers from the angle of their level and their highest virtue. And therefore if [the Jews] lean towards the spilling of blood, they would be veering from the trait of Yaakov, who was fit for the Land, and they would be exiled from it.

Reuben is the leader who might have been but never was. He was Jacob’s firstborn. Jacob said of him on his deathbed, “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might, the first sign of my strength, excelling in honour, excelling in power” (Gen. 49:3). This is an impressive tribute, suggesting physical presence and commanding demeanour.

• As regards the predicate [of the syllogism], viz. 'perish', we consider 'perishing' to be the annihilation of the physical body. For since we can only perceive what is palpable and not the essentials of things, as was explained above, we cannot perceive the intrinsic man. But in truth, though a person's exterior may perish, his essence, which is his internal soul, may thereby achieve bliss and perfection; excelling in pride and excelling in might (Genesis 49:3). The external pain that the senses feel is not proof of an internal pain, that of the soul itself. As has already been explained by the wise: True reward and punishment are not to be found in these perceptible misfortunes; that is, it is fitting that reward and punishment befalling man as a human being be through human goods and human misfortunes, not through benefits and misfortunes which are not human. Since this is the case, and [since] human goods consist of acquiring well-being of the soul - for this belongs to man by virtue of his humanity - not in acquiring sweet foods and [pleasant] sensory objects, for nutrition and sensation do not belong to man by virtue of his humanity, and also since human misfortune consists of the absence of well-being of the soul - I mean that its development be inadequate - it is clear that reward and punishment which befalls man by virtue of his humanity lies in the well-being of the soul and in the lack of such well-being...Since acquisition of well-being of the soul itself depends upon good and just actions...the good and evil which befall man by virtue of his humanity, proceed...in accordance with order and justice. (Gersonides' The Wars of the Lord, Part 4 Chapter 6, translated by J. David Bleich.) And so, even though the body may perish, the soul lives on; continuing to exist, eternal and receiving its reward after death. Regarding this, Zophar says; The real you will yet forget the misery, remembering it like flood waters long gone. For the timeless Hereafter will rise at midday, like daybreak breaking from the shadows, You can be sure of it, for there is hope, When buried in the ground, you will lie in safety, At rest, none shall make you afraid, Yea many will come to seek your intercession (Job 11:16-19).

ובזרעך עד עולם, "and in your offspring, forever." The reason for this is that the soul of man becomes evil, corrupt, through all the spiritually negative forces his sins have created and which become progressively more and more part of his personality. We described these outgrowths previously as being like children one sires or gives birth to. We have also explained in connection with Genesis 49,3 that the mystical element of death which G'd decreed upon Adam and all his descendants is due to the fact that all his descendants have at least indirectly tasted the sin which Adam tasted. The transformation in Adam's character brought about by his eating from the forbidden fruit became part of his genes, and therefore, albeit in a less intense form, part of the genes of his descendants. [Seeing that both Eve and Adam transmitted this, it could easily not become diluted through subsequent matings of one human being with a guilt-free and therefore unpolluted human being. Ed.] This is what the Torah means here when it writes: "and in your offspring, forever."

והותרך ה׳ לטובה בפרי בטנך, "And G'd will give you bountiful goodness, in the fruit of your womb, etc." Although the Torah had already mentioned earlier "the fruit of your womb will be blessed," there is a difference. At that time (verse 4) the promise was in return for studying Torah. Here the promise is a reward for observing the commandments. This is why the Torah had to detail it as one reward cannot be deduced from another reward. The Torah emphasises והותרך השם לטובה, "He will grant you additional goodness," and did not say פרי בטנך, "the fruit of your womb," because this promise is specifically designed to compensate you for observance of the negative commandments. The Torah means that in view of the fact that if one does not violate G'd's commandments one does not create negative, destructive forces in the universe, it follows that one's children will not be afflicted by these negative phenomena which are caused by one's own sins. Compare what I have written on the subject in connection with ראובן בכרי אתה, in Genesis 49,3.

all evildoers are scattered," that man's deeds betray the state of his soul, such as the kind of state referred to in Deut. 29,17 as "a root that bears gall and wormwood." On the other hand, when the soul is wholesome it reflects sanctity. I have written more about this in connection with Jacob's criticising Reuben on his deathbed (Genesis 49,3). We explained there that if Reuben suffered from a character weakness this had to do with what Jacob thought about when he bedded Leah thinking she was Rachel. The arguments of Esau, Ammon and Moav, as well as Ishmael were of a similar nature. They accused G'd of having burdened them with hereditary character weaknesses which would make it difficult if not impossible for them to fulfil those parts of the Torah which G'd had mentioned to them. They did not brag about their faults. They only said that their lifestyle was proof that they had been burdened with such moral weakness as they exhibited already from birth, that the root of their collective soul was polluted. There was, however, a subtle difference between the arguments of Ammon and Moav on one side and those of Esau and Ishmael on the other. Ammon and Moav attributed their problems to an action by their forefather [or better by their respective matriarchs, Lot's daughters, seeing that Lot was unconscious at the time Ed.]. The Ishmaelites went further; they blamed G'd directly seeing that their matriarch Hagar had been told by the angel (Genesis 16,12) that the son she would give birth to would be unbridled and aggressive. The people of Edom blamed their patriarch Isaac who had encouraged Esau to live the life of a murderer by telling him: "you will live by your sword" (Genesis 27,40).

The Torah emphasises "the house of the Lord your G'd," to exclude that such a son be brought to a brothel. Jacob performed this commandment as he said of himself when blessing Reuven: "you are my strength and the first fruit of my virility" (Genesis 49,3).

ויבא אליה. He had marital relations with her. The reason that Jacob did not notice that the woman beside him was not Rachel was that a righteous man of his calibre did not engage in actions that would arouse him before performing the commandment of marital intercourse in order to produce children. There was no one who could match Jacob in this kind of piety. The Torah itself testifies in Genesis 49,3 that he was able to say of himself that Reuben was the product of the first time he emitted semen, i.e. ראשית אוני. Look at our commentary on that verse. He joined Leah without engaging in what is called "foreplay" in our parlance. Even after completing intercourse with Leah Jacob did not recognise her since everything took place in darkness as required by halachah (compare אור החיים 240).

There is another reason why the Torah commences with addressing an individual whereas at the end of the verse it addresses several people, at least. The Torah hints that if a son demonstrates that he respects his own father, the chances are that his son in turn will also show respect for him. You may attribute this to the principle we wrote about in connection with Genesis 49,3 that the roots of sanctity and impurity respectively are found in the mind of the father when he engages in marital intercourse in order to fulfil the commandment to be fruitful and to multiply. His spiritual input at that critical time will be reflected in the spiritual level of the child that is born from a union based on lofty ideals. Alternatively, the matter is psychological. When a son observes that his father belittles his grandfather or grandmother, he in turn will not feel the inclination to show respect or honour to his own father or mother. On the other hand, when a son observes that his father treats his grandfather with great respect, he in turn will be in awe of his father. As a result of such considerations the fulfilment of one act of reverence will lead to the fulfilment of two (or more) acts of reverence spanning at least two generations. This is reflected in the Torah's use of the word תיראו in the plural at the end of our verse. The Torah wrote the word at the end of the verse [not like כבד את אביך at the beginning of the verse in the Ten Commandments, Ed.] to show that one act of respect will eventually produce more acts of respect. This is a perfect illustration of what our sages in Avot 4,2 described as מצוה גוררת מצוה, that the fulfilment of one מצוה brings another in its wake.

Another thing which you the reader must know is that some people achieve the highest of the levels of spirituality we have described, i.e. they possess the נשמה לנשמה, whereas others achieve only lower levels respectively. However, if someone has not progressed beyond the level of possessing the נפש which is common to all creatures at birth even his good deeds count for nothing. His deeds do not possess the spiritual power to raise them towards the celestial regions. Our deeds in this terrestrial world impact on higher celestial regions only by means of the רוח, the first higher level of spirituality. The נפש itself is elevated to the level of רוח by means of man's (intentional) good deeds. When man achieves that level, the good deeds he performed previously become "his own," so that he is called in our literature בעל מעשים טובים, "the owner of good deeds." This is the mystical dimension of Proverbs 23,2: אם בעל נפש אתה, "if you have become the owner of the נפש. Ownership of your נפש is the result of having laboured to acquire it. The concept is that the רוח becomes the "owner" of the נפש as a result of fatigue caused by performance of good deeds by the body whom it inhabits. Both the נפש and the רוח ascend together and imbibe from the same holy source of sustenance as equals. The same holds true for the רוח in its value relationship compared to the נשמה, and for the נשמה in its comparative value relationship with the נשמה לנשמה. Acquisiton of the requisite spiritual level by a person may be due to one of two reasons. 1) The spiritual power bestowed by the father at the time of conception of the fetus; I have explained this in greater detail in Genesis 49,3 on the words ראובן בכרי, "Reuben is my firstborn." 2) It may be achieved by the independent effort of the person involved especially if assisted by Torah study. In connection with Leviticus 22,27: שור או כשב או עז כי יולד, "when an ox, a sheep, or a goat is born, etc.." The Zohar volume 3 page 91 describes that a human being through the help of Torah study is capable by his own efforts to achieve the highest spiritual plateau even though at birth he was spiritually under-endowed to the worst possible degree. The key to his success is how much he is prepared to tire himself in the process of Torah study. You should realise that in addition to the positive achievements of a spiritual nature we have described, the residue of Adam's sin which inhabits every human being to a greater or lesser degree affects different categories of people differently according to the level of spirituality they have attained. The reason for this is simply that the impact of that residue on the force called נפש is not to be compared with the impact of that same residue of spiritual pollution on such forces as רוח, נשמה, or נשמה לנשמה respectively.

Shabbat 89 has the patriarchs Abraham and Jacob saying to G'd who had told them: "your children have sinned," that the Israelites who had spurned Him should be wiped off the face of the earth in order that G'd's honour not be impugned. Even the patriarchs did not want someone to anger G'd. Regarding the argument used by Moses during the episode of the golden calf that "G'd had taken so much trouble to orchestrate the Exodus of the Jewish people," and that therefore a new Jewish people could not have evolved during so many hundreds of years in an iron crucible such as Egypt, G'd said that in the end all these trials had proved worthless. The people did not even have faith in G'd after all the miracles He had performed on their behalf. As far as keeping the oath to the patriarchs was concerned, G'd suggested that Moses would become the founding member of a new nation descended from the original patriarchs. There remained the problem of how could one be certain that a new Jewish nation based on Moses would be any better than the present one? G'd argued that if the souls of the new Jewish nation would be based on Moses, surely they would be greater than those of the present Jewish people. Such souls would be closer to the source of sanctity than the souls of the present Jewish people had been. Compare my commentary on Genesis 49,3 about Reuben's soul having been flawed. The very fact that the present Jewish people had spent so many years in the morally corrupt climate of Egypt was a strike against them which a nation based on Moses would not have to contend with.

‘BEN ONI’ (THE SON OF MY SORROW). I am of the opinion that he was so called because he alone was born in the land of Canaan which lies to the south (yamin) as one comes from Aram-naharaim, just as it is said: In the south, in the land of Canaan; (Numbers 33:40.) Going on still toward the south. (Above, 12:9.) Binyamin thus means a son of the south, just as in the verse: The north ‘v’yamin’ (and the south) Thou hast created them. (Psalms 89:13.) For this reason the name Binyamin is here written “full” [with a yud after the mem to indicate that the name is derived from the word yamin (south)]. This is Rashi’s language. But I do not understand this claim that the Land of Israel lies to the south of Aram-naharaim for Aram is eastward of the Land of Israel, as it is written, And he came to the land of the children of the east, (Above, 29:1. ) and it is further written, From Aram Balak bringeth me, the king of Moab from the mountains of the East, (Numbers 23:7.) and Jacob crossed the Jordan which is to the east of the Land of Israel, and he returned by way of Edom which is south of the Land of Israel. Thus you find that Aram is south-east of the Land of Israel, and the Land of Israel is to its north. However, if Benjamin was born within the border of Bethlehem Ephrathah which is in the land of Judah — as it is written, Bethlehem in Judah, (Judges 19:2.) and it is further written, But thou, Bethlehem Ephratha, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah (Micah 5:1.) — this was in the south of the Land of Israel, and he was thus born between Beth-el and Bethlehem Ephrath. And if the place was in the hill country of Ephraim, then it is in the north of the Land of Israel, as it is written, Judah shall abide in his border on the south, and the house of Joseph shall abide in their border on the north. (Joshua 18:5.) And if it was in the portion of Benjamin, it was also not in the south, for it is written, And their border was on the north side. (Ibid., Verse 12.) Thus in any case there was no reason to call Benjamin “a son of the south.” The correct interpretation appears to me to be that his mother called him ben oni, and she meant to say, “the son of my mourning, similar in expression to: bread of ‘onim’ (mourners); (Hosea 9:4.) I have not eaten thereof ‘b’oni’ (in my mourning). (Deuteronomy 26:14.) And his father understood the word oni in the sense of “my strength,” similar in expression to: the first-fruits of ‘oni’ (my strength); (Genesis 49:29.) And to those who have no ‘onim’ (power). (Isaiah 40:29.) And therefore he called him Binyamin, “the son of power” or “the son of strength,” for in the right hand (yamin) there is strength and success, just as it is written: A wise man’s understanding is at his right hand; (Ecclesiastes 10:2.) Thy right hand shall overtake all those that hate thee; (Psalms 21:9.) The right hand of the Eternal is exalted. (Ibid., 118:16.) Jacob wanted to call him by the name his mother had called him, for all his children were called by the names their mothers had called them, and he thus rendered it to good and to strength. Now I have seen in Bereshith Rabbah: (82:10.) “Ben oni, ‘the son of my sorrow.’ And his father called him Benjamin, i.e., in the Sacred Language.” I do not know what this means for it is all the Sacred Language, and so are the names of all his sons in the Sacred Language. However, the Rabbis have alluded to that which I have said, namely, that Jacob rendered the expression so that it signified good.

כי את הבכור, the word כי means אלא, but. כי הוא ראשית אונו, for he is entitled to inherit the first of his father’s money. We find that the word און appears in this sense in Hoseah 12,9 מצאתי און לי, [clearly it cannot mean “I have found my virility there”, as it does in Genesis 49,3. Ed.] The word און also occurs in the sense of money in Job 20,10 וידיו תשיבנה אונו, “his own hands must give back his wealth.”

בראשית ברא אלוקים, let the “intellectuals” realize that all the words of our sages and their interpretations are true and accurate. This is what the Talmud (Shabbat 63) had in mind when it quoted Rav Kahane saying that he had studied the Talmud until the age of 18 and had not yet appreciated that although the laws of the Torah are derived from the text, none of the interpretations are such that they can uproot the plain meaning of the text. They are based on anomalies in the text, not on the text itself wherever the law derived from the Torah appears to conflict with the plain meaning of the text. One example is Genesis 2,4 where the word בהבראם, a most unusual construction, used by the sages to declare that the world was created “for the sake of, or with the help of אברהם,” (Bereshit Rabbah 12,9) seeing that the letters in that word are the same as the ones in the name אברהם, [though in a different sequence. Ed.] I shall list the explanations of earlier commentators of old, in order to demonstrate why I did not follow in their footsteps. Some scholars understand the first verse to mean that “at the beginning G’d created heaven and earth.” This is an erroneous explanation, seeing that water preceded the creation of heaven and earth as we know from verse 2 where “the spirit of G’d” is described as already “hovering over the surface of the water.” Moreover, the Torah did not write בראשונה, which would have been appropriate if it had wanted to tell us that heaven and earth preceded all other phenomena in the universe. The word בראשית is in a construct mode, as in Genesis 10,10 ותהי ראשית ממלכתו בבל “the mainstay of his kingdom was Babylon.” A construct mode like this cannot describe the commencement of something but refers to something already in existence. As to the scholars who understand the word as equivalent to the word תחלה in Hoseah 1,2 i.e. so that it would mean “at the beginning G’d created the heaven,” i.e. before He created heaven and earth there was chaos, darkness on the face of the water, etc., so that it emerges that water had been created first, this too is nonsense. How could the Torah refer to a state of the earth prior to creation of the heaven? The plain meaning of the text is, as occurs many times, that something may be mentioned first in one instance although elsewhere this same phenomenon is mentioned as having occurred at a later stage. In Genesis 9,18 we are told about the three sons of Noach who left the ark after the deluge being Shem, Cham and Yephet, and the Torah adds that Cham was the father of Canaan. Although the information about Canaan is quite out of place at this juncture, the fact that later on the Torah tells us that Noach cursed Canaan, makes it necessary to mention him here, as otherwise we would not have known who this Canaan was whom Noachh cursed in verse 25 of the same chapter. We have a similar situation in Genesis 35,22 where, although Reuven’s conduct with Yaakov’s concubine Bilhah is mentioned, Yaakov’s reaction is not mentioned until shortly before his death when he explains why Reuven had not been viewed by him as suitable to occupy the position normally accorded to a firstborn (Genesis 49,3-4). In 35,22 the Torah already tells us that Yaakov had heard about what Reuven had done. Had the Torah not done so, the reader would have been taken aback at Yaakov’s remonstrating with Reuven at this late stage. There are many such examples. Our entire paragraph here was written by Moses in order for us to understand what is written in the Ten Commandments concerning the reason why the Sabbath is holy, i.e. that it is a symbol reminding us of the fact that G’d created the universe in 6 days and rested on the seventh day. (Exodus 20,10) If anyone were to think that the universe as such had already existed then in the format that we see it now, the Torah corrects such thinking by continuing with

הקבצו ושמעו! diese beiden Worte des sterbenden Vaters tragen die ganze jüdische Geschichte bis zum אחרית הימים. Materiell seid ihr בני יעקב, eine machtlose Minorität. Weil ihr aber eine so machtlose Minderheit seid, הקבצו, haltet zusammen, wachset ineinander, lasset euch nicht zerfällen, im קבוץ, in der Eintracht liegt eure Stärke; — und שמעו בני יעקב: nur durch eins kann die materiell schwächste Minderzahl der stärksten Majorität den Sieg abgewinnen, es ist der Geist, es ist שמעו, es ist die Hingebung an Geistiges, darum: שמעו בני יעקב! habet ein Ohr, habet Sinn fürs Geistige, "durstet" nach Geistigem, wie das Wort in seiner Tiefe heißt (שמע ist das geistige צמא), schöpfet, trinket gerne Geist! Dies ist das Testament unseres Vaters Jakob. "Eintracht und Geist" darin erkennt er Stärke und Leben seiner Kinder, und "wenn der Durst nach Geist in euch wach wird, so habet keinen anderen Durst als nach den Überlieferungen eures Vaters Jisrael, ושמעו אל ישראל אביכם!" Der Trunk aus dem jüdischen Born des Geistes und einträchtiges Zusammenhalten, dahin lautet das älteste Vermächtnis unseres sterbenden Vaters und das ruft uns noch das späteste Prophetenwort zu: והאמת והשלום אהבו (Secharja 8, 19). 
Raw Hirsch on Genesis 49: 3. הקבצו ,האספו, waren die ersten Gedanken, die Jakob beim Anblick seiner Söhne um sein Sterbelager erfüllten. Das Aneinanderhalten und das wache Interesse für alles Geistige war zunächst das Vermächtnis für alle. Soll aber eine solche, aus so verschiedenen Elementen bestehende Gesamtheit eine innere und äußere Einheit bilden, so bedarf sie einer Leitung; diese leitende Spitze sucht Jakob und mustert dazu seine Söhne. Am natürlichsten wäre diese Stellung dem Erstgeborenen zugekommen. Daher wendet er sich zuerst an Reuben.

There is an even stronger connection. The unusual phrase “first of [his father’s] strength” appears only twice in the Torah, here (“for he is the first of his father’s strength”) and in relation to Reuben, Leah’s firstborn: “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might and the first of my strength, first in rank and first in power” (Gen. 49:3).

To close out the text’s celebration of the exodus event, the editor includes a peroration on the firstborn. This too is a reinterpretation of earlier religious practices. Many ancient cultures selected the firstborn as an object for sacrifice to the gods—whether firstborn of fruit, of animals, or of human beings—the grounds for this being that the firstborn represents the best that nature has to offer (see Gen. 49:3, where Jacob’s firstborn is “beginning of my strength”). The idea of strength is played upon in the reinterpretation of sacrifice: four times, including at the end of the passage, we are told that the firstborn is to be consecrated, “for by strength of hand Yhwh brought you out of Egypt” (vv.3, 9, 14, 16).

BELOVED IS MAN, WHO WAS CREATED IN THE IMAGE. EVEN GREATER LOVE… AS THE VERSE SAYS, “FOR HE HAS CREATED MAN IN THE IMAGE OF GOD.” Rashi: man is beloved, as he was created in the image. Therefore, he must do the will of his Maker. R. Akiva was speaking of all men, as the verse he quotes for proof was said to all the sons of Noah, and not only to the sons of Israel. R. Akiva wished to find merit for all men, including Noahides. Rambam says this clearly in Hilchot Melachim 8:10: Moses commanded us in the name of G-d to compel all men to accept the seven commandments that the sons of Noah were commanded. Whoever does not accept them shall be executed. Such a one as accepts them is referred to as ger toshav in rabbinic literature… Whoever accepts the seven commandments and is careful to keep them is called one of the “pious of the nations” and has a share in the world to come. This is provided he accepts them keeps them because G-d has commanded them in the Torah and made known through Moses that the sons of Noah had previously been commanded to keep them. But if he does these things because his reason compels him he is not a ger toshav and is not one of the “pious of the nations,” or even [the text should read “but rather”] one of their wise men. Therefore, I wonder why it is that the commentators remained so distant from this approach and did not want to use it to explain the words of R. Akiva as applying to all men, limiting them instead to Jews alone. They drew support from the passage in the Talmud (Yevamot 61a), “you are called ‘man’, etc.”, stacking one midrashic reading on top of another! (The passage in Yevamot 61a is a midrashic reading of the word “man” in a verse in Ezekiel, and to assume that our mishna is using the word “man” to mean Jews only is likewise a midrashic reading; the end result, therefore, is midrashically reading “man” in our mishna based on further midrashically reading “man” in Ezekiel.) Because of this they had to contrive a forced understanding of the “image” and the verse that our mishna brings as proof. In my opinion, the following approach is the spacious, paved road. R. Akiva intends to instruct all men as we were commanded to do by Moses, per Rambam above. If that command extends to threats of destruction by the sword, it certainly includes persuasive speech intended to draw them to the will of their Maker. He speaks well of them and says that they are beloved in that they are created “in the image” in order to show them that the law of man is to keep the statutes and laws of G-d, as Rambam says. For since man is beloved of G-d, to the point that they he was created in His image, he must do the will of his maker, as Rashi writes. Now we understand why the mishna chooses this verse, despite the fact that there are several similar verses that precede it, for instance “Let us make man in Our image.” For this verse is the only one that is given as a rationale for a commandment; when G-d commands Noah and his sons not to kill, he gives the reason “because G-d has made man in His image,” and R. Akiva is speaking to the Noahides as well. We also understand why here the mishna says “in the image” and leaves out the verse’s descriptor “of G-d”, but later in the section about “children” it says “they were called children of G-d”, for this is a rebuke to the nations. They were created “in the image,” i.e. “in the image of G-d”, but only created such—since they do not keep the commandments, or if they do keep them they do not do so because G-d commanded them, they cannot be described as being “in the image of G-d”. This also accords with the idea of “the image,” which Rambam has explained in the Guide for the Perplexed 1:1 as referring to the intellect that is unique to man and is his true essence. The purpose of this intellect is to know G-d to the extent it is possible and within man’s abilities. This truly wise sage chose his words cleverly and did not say that they are “in the image of G-d,” for they are lacking knowledge of G-d, and when the verse says that He “made man in the image of G-d” it means that this was the intent of the creation of man, i.e. that he have the kind of intellect which can reach knowledge of G-d. Since, however, the reality is that “they neither know nor understand, they go about in darkness” (Psalms 82:5) and the potential has not been actualized, it is only fitting that the mishna say they were created “in the image” and not “in the image of G-d”, since the intended knowledge of G-d was not achieved and they are left only with potential, which is fittingly called simply “the image.” This seems to be the explanation of R. Akiva’s words. Based on this, we can see that the following mishna has chosen its language very carefully, as I will explain there. Also, this is another facet of why Israel is “especially beloved”—for they are already beloved to G-d as part of mankind, which He made in His image, and they are still more beloved, “foremost in rank and foremost in honor” (Genesis 49:3), on account of two other things: they are children of G-d, which is the “rank” as it is a great virtue, and they possess the desirable utensil, the Torah, which is “honor,” as in “G-d will give his nation honor” (Psalms 29:11) [*which verse the Sages have expounded in the Talmud, Zevachim 116a as referring to the Torah].

It was a rather subdued Reuben, haphazardly retreated to a sprawling jumble of tents, who was most easily dismantled by the Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser in 732 Bce, as he waged his first campaign against the Kingdom of Israel. Tiglath-Pileser managed a painless victory against Reuben, who finally lay claim to being first: “Reuben, you will be the first to receive your land inheritance…and also the first to lose it” (Yalkut Shimoni 157). (Also MHG, Genesis 49:3. Compare with BR 82:11.)

בנימין, “son of my right.” Rashi explains the name in terms of Binyamin being the only one of Yaakov’s sons who had been born on the soil of the Holy Land. This land is to the south when one comes from Aram Naharayim, i.e. it is on the right hand side of the traveler. Nachmanides objects by proving that the Land of Israel is not situated to the south of Aram Naharayim. He claims that the reason that Yaakov called this son Binyamin was because his mother had called him Ben Oni, a word having a negative connotation, so that his father gave this word a positive connotation, i.e. he did not change the name but the meaning of the name, giving it the same meaning as in Genesis 49,3 where he described Reuven as כוחי וראשית אוני, “my strength and the first of my vigor.” The word בנימין referring to the strength of one’s right hand, is therefore very appropriate [all Biblical atlases have Aram Naharayim north-east of the land of Israel, so that Rashi appears correct, from the point of view of Geography, though Nachmanides’ approach that Yaakov did not actually change the name Rachel gave is more appealing. Ed.] Basically, all the sons remained known by the names given them by their mothers. Yaakov simply gave the name Ben Oni a positive connotation.

ויתן לו את אסנת בת פוטיפרע...לאשה, “He gave him Ossnat, daughter of Potiphera as a wife.” He did not give him as a wife the daughter of a member of the Egyptian political hierarchy, but the daughter of Potiphar, Joseph’s former master. This was a politically inspired move, designed to stifle any protest movement that might be sparked by Potiphar resenting that his former slave had now become the economic czar of the empire, with power over life and death. Seeing that he made Joseph Potiphar’s son-in-law by this astute maneuver, he was certain that the former master would now boast about being Joseph’s father-in-law. Rashi also agrees that the man called here Potiphera, was the one that used to be Joseph’s master and is known to us as Potiphar. The name change reflects that he had become castrated. The description by the Torah of the position of this man as “the priest of On,” prompted Rashi to give this commentary, as the word און is an expression of “greatness, strength,” as we know from Yaakov describing his first born son Reuven as ראשית אוני, “the first product of my virility” (Genesis 49,3). In his capacity as the chief executioner, Potiphar occupied a position of power. Nachmanides writes that the attribute כהן און, indicates that as a result of his castration Potiphar felt very embarrassed and decided to devote the rest of his life to a monk-like existence in a Temple, far from the eyes of the world. It is quite possible that the word “On” is the designation given to the specific deity whom Potiphar worshipped as a priest. The description of Yitro as כהן מדין, similarly describes the deity that Yitro used to serve in his position of priest. Our sages illustrate this when they said that he would offer fatted calves to this deity. (compare Yalkut Shimoni Judges 1) Some commentators claim that Potiphar took refuge in a monastery out of fear that Joseph would revenge himself on him for having thrown him into jail.

Abaye said: Is that to say that everyone is like our Patriarch Jacob, with regard to whom it is written: “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might and the first fruits of my strength” (Genesis 49:3), implying that Jacob never experienced an emission of semen in all his days, so that his eldest son Reuben was conceived from his first drop of seed, i.e., “the first fruits of my strength.” The implication is that there is certainly no need for such measures in order to bring a man to ejaculate.

May Reuben live and not die, Though few be his numbers.

Reuvein, you are my firstborn, you are my strength, and the beginning of my manhood [power]; superior in rank and superior in power [it would have been right for you to take three portions—the birthright, the priesthood, and the kingship].

REUBEN, my firstborn art thou, my strength, and the beginning of my sorrow. To thee my son Reuben would it have pertained to receive three portions above thy brethren, birthright, priesthood, kingdom: but because thou hast sinned, Reuben, my son, the birthright is given unto Joseph, the kingdom to Jehuda, and the high priesthood to the tribe of Levi.

Reuben thou art my firstborn, the beginning of the strength of my generation, and the chief event of my thoughts To thee belonged the birthright, and the high priesthood, and the kingdom: but because thou hast sinned, my son, the birthright is given to Joseph, and the, kingdom to Jehuda, and the priesthood to Levi.

Genesis 49,4. “unstable as water, you will not enjoy ‎the additional portion due to the firstborn;” How could ‎Yaakov deliberately ignore the commandment not to deprive ‎even the son of a wife who was hated of the rights accruing to ‎him as a firstborn? (Deut. 21,17) Nachmanides writes concerning ‎this problem that Yaakov penalized Reuven in accordance with ‎the nature of his sin. Personally, I believe that Yaakov saw in his prophetic ‎vision of the future what the Torah calls ‎גוי וקהל גויים‎, “a nation ‎and a community of nations,” (Genesis 35,11) a promise made to ‎him by G’d at a time when he personally had concluded siring ‎children, that another two tribes would become part of the Jewish ‎people, so that in order for the number of tribes not to exceed ‎the number 12, “something had to give.” He had not been aware ‎that these two “tribes” would not be sons, but grandsons of his. ‎The only way he was able to explain G’d’s promise of two more ‎tribes was by assuming that an existing one would prove ‎unworthy.‎

Yosef, who guarded the brit, gained the rights of the firstborn. This corresponds to the divine service of prayer, which is an aspect of the double portion [inherited by the firstborn]. For prayer is itself twofold, as it is comprised of both praise of God and requesting one’s needs. This corresponds to “a double-edged sword in their hand” (Psalms 149:6) —i.e., two edges, a double portion. It was taken from Reuven, because he defiled his father’s bed (Genesis 49:4) ; for [the birthright] is dependent upon guarding the brit .

כי עלית, “when you mounted;” “you desecrated Him Who is present even when I have intimate relations with my wife.” Yaakov accuses Reuven that as of the day when he invaded his privacy, he no longer had marital relations with Bilhah. Furthermore, when you desecrated my couch, you desecrated yourself and removed the sanctity of the kingship and the first-born status from yourself. Thus Jacob transferred the first-born status to Joseph. There are commentators who explained that Jacob said all of this to his other sons so that they should not wonder why he spoke so harshly to Reuven who had sinned gravely. The word עלה occurs in the sense of “departing, withdrawing its presence,” also in Psalms 102,25: על תעלני בחצי ימי, “do not take me away in the midst of my days.”

כי עלית על משכבי אביך, “you went up to your father’s bed;” On which occasion did this take place? At the time when Leah traded Yaakov’s turn to spend the night with Rachel for the mandrakes her son Reuven had found. (Genesis 30,15). (Br’eshit Rabbah 96.4)

חללת יצועי עלה, “you did defile Him Who used to ascend my couch. (The Holy Spirit)” Yaakov’s curse was to remain in force until Moses Deuteronomy 33,6 said: יחי ראובן ואל ימות, “may Reuven live and not die.” In the meantime it had been Moses who was allowed to ascend to G–d’s residence on the Mount; (Exodus ומשה עלה 19,3). An alternate interpretation of this phrase: “you have desecrated my couch which until that time had been on a higher level than that of my father and grandfather, each of whom had had a son that was not loyal to the Jewish tradition.” Yaakov, as if speaking about a third person, when he said משכבי אביך, “the couch of your father,” instead of: “my couch,” repeated this method when saying יצועי עלה, “he ascended my bed.”

UNSTABLE. Because you acted unstably as water does.

HAVE NOT THOU THE EXCELLENCY. (Some say) that al totar (have not thou the excellency) means, you will not have the advantage. (According to this interpretation our line reads: Unstable as water / you will not have the advantage; i.e., because you acted unstably as water does, you will not have the advantage of rank and power.) However, if this were the case then our text should have read al tutar rather than al totar; i.e., the vav of totar should have been vocalized with a shuruk. (Totar is vocalized with a cholam. If al totar means you will not have the advantage then totar is a passive, i.e., a hofal, and should be written tutar and not totar which is a hifil and a causative. Cf. Filwarg.) Others say that our clause should be interpreted thus: you acted unstably as water that is poured out of a vessel and you gained nothing thereby (al totar). (The advantage of this interpretation is that totar is not irregularly vocalized. Al totar is a hifil imperfect with the meaning of a perfect It literally means you will not gain. Here it means you did not gain anything; that is, you gained nothing by acting rashly. For an alternate interpretation see Krinsky.) However, I disagree with this interpretation. The term al is always used in Scripture as an imperative. (The point is al totar cannot be translated as you gained nothing because al is an imperative meaning don’t This comment also negates the first interpretation quoted by I.E. since there, too, al is not used as an imperative (Filwarg).) The latter fact is not negated by the fact that we find al used once in a non-imperative sense in In the way of righteousness is life, And in the pathway thereof there is no (al) death (Prov. 12:28). (I.E.’s point is that one irregular usage of al does not disprove his contention that al is always used as an imperative.) The correct translation of our clause is: do not seek any advantage (al totar) even one as insignificant as water. (In other words al totar means do not seek any advantage. This comment presents a problem. I.E. reads, “even one as insignificant as water (afilu pachaz ka-mayim).” This reading is extremely difficult since up to now I.E. explains pachaz ka-mayim as referring to Reuben’s action, not to Reuben’s punishment. Filwarg suggests deleting these words. Krinsky and Cherez emend afilu to attah (you). Weiser suggests that this comment has been misplaced and that its proper place is after Saadiah’s comment. In this case I.E. amplifies Saadiah’s explanation that pachaz means something insignificant. However, it appears that I.E. anticipated Saadiah’s interpretation of pachaz ka-mayim.) Accordingly the vav of totar is properly vocalized with a cholam, and it follows the paradigm of tosaf (more) in Think upon the battle, thou wilt do so no more (al tosaf) (Job 40:32). (Totar is a hifil and follows the paradigm of tosaf which is also a hifil. Since tosaf is a hifil the text should have read tosef. But as the word comes at the end of a verse the tzere changes to a pattach. Similarly totar should have been written toter but as it concludes a segment of a poetical line the tzere changes to a pattach. Cf. Rashi on Job 40:32 (Cherez). Thus totar is similar to tosaf.) Rabbi Saadiah Gaon explains our line as follows: you will not have any advantage over your brothers even one as insignificant as water. According to Saadiah pachaz (unstable) comes from the same root as pochazim (light, insignificant) in vain and light (pochazim) fellows (Judges 9:4), and the root of the word pachaz does not have to be inverted. (As it must be if we interpret the word to mean unstable. Pachaz (unstable) comes from the root chet, peh, zayin (chafaz) which means to hurry. However, the root of pachaz is obviously peh, chet, zayin. By interpreting pachaz to mean unstable we are saying that we must invert the root chet, peh, zayin into peh, chet, zayin. However, according to Saadiah pachaz has its own root, peh, chet, zayin, and means light, insignificant.)

THEN DEFILEDST THOU IT. From the day that thou defiled my couch, my conjugal couch was removed. (The part of the verse under discussion reads: Then defiledst thou / my couch went up. I.E. reads “my couch went up” as if written, my couch went up from me. He interprets it to mean, my couch was taken away from me. According to I.E., in Chapter 7 of his Yesod Mora, Jacob ceased cohabiting with his wives after Reuben defiled his couch. His reason was: Rachel was dead, Bilhah defiled, and he was angry at Leah because of what her son did and therefore slept neither with her nor her handmaiden Zilpah. “My couch went up” thus means, my conjugal bed ceased to function. Filwarg suggests that the reference may be only to Bilhah.) Yetzu’i alah (he went up to my couch) is to be interpreted as if written yetzu’i alah me’alai (my conjugal couch went up from me). Furthermore, the word alah (went up) at times has the meaning of cut off, (In this case yetzu’i alah means my couch was cut off or destroyed.) as in O my God, take me not away (al ta’aleni) in the midst of my days (Ps. 102:25). Our chapter is clearly explained in Chronicles where we read, Reuben (was) the first-born of Israel…but, forasmuch as he defiled his father’s couch, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel, and he was not to be reckoned in the genealogy as first-born (I Chron. 5:1). Chronicles then tells us that Joseph received the birthright and Judah the kingship (Ibid. v. 2). Some explain that and he was not to be reckoned in the genealogy as first-born means that the listing of the order of the twelve sons would start with Reuben. (In other words, and he was not to be reckoned in the genealogy as first born refers to Joseph, not to Reuben.)

פחז במים, "Hasty, like water, etc." Jacob accused Reuben of acting with haste, not trying to control his emotions and urges, failing to vanquish the spark of evil which was rooted within him. As a result of that failure he would be deprived of the three distinctions we have described i.e. birthright, priesthood and royalty.

When Jacob added אל תותר, he hinted that although Reuben had displayed haste in doing something which held no advantage for him, he had not displayed the same haste when it came to doing something useful, i.e. repenting his mistake. Our sages in Baba Kama 92 say that it was Yehudah who triggered Reuben's eventual repentance. Although Bereshit Rabbah 84,19 states that G'd complimented Reuben on being the first human being who had repented [without having been accused by anyone as yet, Ed.], Reuben had not uttered a confession of his sin until he had heard about Yehudah doing this during Tamar's trial. Perhaps Reuben's tardiness in confessing his mistake was the reason that royalty was conferred on the descendants of Yehudah instead. It was Yehudah's reward for being the cause that triggered the final stage in Reuben's repentance. Reuben may have lost the priesthood to the descendants of Levi as a result of later developments as mentioned in Deut. 33,8 לאיש חסידך אשר נסיתו במסה, "Be with Your faithful one whom You tested at Massah" (when that tribe did not complain). Regardless of when Levi qualified for the priesthood, Reuben forfeited his claim to it already during Jacob's time. The words אל תותר mean that Reuben was deprived of all his erstwhile advantages over his brothers. Jacob transferred one of his former distinctions to Joseph, a second one to Yehudah, and he left the third one pending until G'd eventually accorded it to part of the tribe of Levi.

Jacob said כי עלית to explain how it was possible that a son of his could commit such an act. He hinted that at the time (the wedding night) his thoughts had been confused as he had been under the impression that he had married and was sleeping with Rachel. In other words, he had actually slept in two beds, physically he had shared Leah's bed, whereas mentally he had considered himself in bed with Rachel. This is the reason Jacob spoke about Reuben having mounted משכבי אביך, the beds (pl) of your father. This was the original cause of Reuben eventually becoming guilty of his misdemeanour. When Jacob added the word אז, then, he indicated that the true defilement took place then; the first time Reuben desecrated his father's bed was at the time he was conceived in the wrong womb, Leah's instead of Rachel's. Jacob's משכבים were desecrated at that time, whereas Reuben personally had defiled Jacob's יצוע when he mounted the bed in Bilhah's tent.

כי עלית משכבי אביך, “because you mounted the couch of your father.” Yaakov revealed here that when the Torah wrote of Reuven that he “slept with Bilhah” (Genesis 38,22) that that verse is not to be taken literally, but that all he did was to disarrange the sheets on his father’s couch, compare Shabbat 55 where it is made clear that Yaakov criticised Reuven only for mounting the bed. This in itself was an act of desecration. According to the Talmud the words אז חללת...אביך must be understood as “then you desecrated your father (in heaven) whose Presence was associated with my bed.” Proof of the validity of this interpretation is the fact that Yaakov spoke of משכבי אביך, “your father’s beds (pl).” On the same folio of the Talmud our sages also said that this means that Reuven desecrated two couches, two sheets, that of his father, and that of the Divine Presence. The authors of that interpretation were forced to say this as they were of the opinion that the Divine Presence, שכינה, was ever present in Yaakov’s vicinity. G’d was never out of Yaakov’s thoughts. We have an interesting nuance in Genesis 30,16 where the Torah speaks of Yaakov sleeping with Leah on a night which was not originally her turn [in return for her giving Reuven’s dudaim to Rachel. Ed.]. The Torah does not write וישכב עמה בלילה ההוא, “he slept with her on that night,” but it writes: וישכב עמה בלילה הוא, “He (G’d) slept with her at night.” This is proof that the Divine Presence was present even on Yaakov’s couch. Leah’s conceiving on that night may well have been helped by that Divine Presence. She may have been aware of this when she called the son born to her as a result יששכר. This episode also teaches that anyone who honours his father also honours G’d vicariouly. Conversely, anyone who dishonours his father dishonours G’d at the same time. All of this corresponds to what our sages (Kidushin 30) taught that every human being is the result of input by three partners, i.e. his father, his mother, and G’d (who provides the soul). As a result, G’d accounts it as a meritorious deed when someone honours his father and mother, seeing that by honouring His partners such people honour G’d Himself. By doing this they treat G’d as if He were present in the company of his parents. Another Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni 157) states that the words אז חללת יצועי עלה, reflect Yaakov saying to his son Reuven: “your sin will not be fully expiated until the presence on earth of the one of whom the Torah writes (Exodus 19,3) ומשה עלה אל האלו-הים, ‘and Moses ascended to G’d.’” When Moses came to Mount Eyval (Deut. 27,20) and appointed the tribe of Reuven as the first one (amongst the ones who would utter the curses) we find that the paragraph contains the words: “cursed anyone who sleeps with the wife of his father.” This is proof that by that time Reuven’s misdemeanor had finally been totally expiated. You should also know that the very name Reuven is an allusion to the attribute of Justice and how it operates in our terrestrial world. I have dealt with the subject of the mystical dimension of the names of the twelve sons of Yaakov in Genesis 29, 32-34.

כי עלית משכבי אביך, when you committed that act, חללת יצועי, you defiled my couch; your act prevented me from having any further marital relations with my wife Bilhah. My grandfather explained the expression יתר שאת as an allusion to atonement. [שאת from the root נשא, to elevate, i.e. to forgive as in ונשאתי לכל המקום, “I will forgive the whole place” (Genesis 18,26) Ed.] If so, far from putting down Reuven in his final words to him, Yaakov blessed him by offering his forgiveness at this time for the sin he had committed. against him.

UNSTABLE (‘PACHAZ’) AS WATER, YOU HAVE NOT THE EXCELLENCY. Pachaz is a noun, derived from the expression, Vain and reckless (‘upachazim’) fellows, (Judges 9:4.) meaning “hasty and impulsive people.” Our Rabbis have made steady use of this word: “I was looking at my image in the water and my evil inclination rose (pachaz) within me,” (Nedarim 9b.) that is “my evil inclination leaped upon me” They said further: “It is their recklessness (apichzeihu) which they are revealing,” (Sanhedrin 57a. See Note 63 in my Hebrew commentary, p. 265.) meaning their impulsiveness. “A reckless (p’chizah) people, who spoke before listening, you still retain your recklessness (‘b’pachzuteich’),” (Shabbath 88a.) meaning “hasty and impulsive.” It is possible that this word pachaz is a permutation of the word chipazon (hurry). (As is the case with the words; keves and kesev, both of which mean “lamb,” and other similar words.) Jacob was thus saying: “Since you burst forth as water, you shall no longer excel for thou wentest up to thy father’s place of repose in thy haste and impulsiveness. Then didst thou profane them, (The Hebrew is mishk’vei (places of repose), which is in the plural form. Hence Ramban writes otham (them).) when your recklessness ascended my couch like the rising and gushing water.” This is similar to the Scriptural description of water: Now, therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, mighty and many, even the king of Assyria and all his glory; and he shall come up over all his channels, and go over all his banks; and he shall sweep through Judah, overflowing as he passeth through. (Isaiah 8:7-8.) Our Rabbis have said: (Shabbath 55b. It is found here in Rashi in the form mentioned by Ramban.) “Then didst thou profane He Who hovered over my couch, meaning the Shechinah” that used to abide above my [Jacob’s] couch. Yet the verse says, Forasmuch as he [Reuben] defiled his father’s couch, (I Chronicles 5:1. This clearly shows that it was “the couch” which was defiled and not, as the comment of Rashi would have it, the Shechina. Ramban proceeds to answer that Scripture modifies the expression out of respect for the Divine Presence.) thus clearly stating that it was the couch which was defiled! But perhaps [out of respect for the Divine Presence, Scripture] modifies the expression there. But if [we accept the explanation that Scripture modifies the expression], it is possible that the word alah (going up) refers to [Jacob, thus saying, “then didst thou profane my couch upon which I used to go up],” just as in the verse, Nor go up into the bed that is spread for me. (Psalms 132:3.) Thus Jacob’s intent is to say: “Then thou didst defile me;” He spoke in the third person (Alah, “he” went up.) only as a matter of respect. Similarly, the verse, Forasmuch as he defiled his father’s couch, (I Chronicles 5:1.) is a Scriptural modification, meaning “forasmuch as he [Reuben] defiled the one who goes up (I.e., Jacob. His name though is not mentioned directly, as a matter of respect.) upon his father’s couch.” From the literal meaning of this verse it would appear as I have explained it in Seder Vayishlach, (Above, 35:22.) i.e., that it was Reuben’s intention to disqualify Bilhah from his father so that she should no longer give birth to children, thus lessening his share as the firstborn. It was for this reason that Jacob said to him that it was reckless and impulsive to think that he would gain thereby, whereas he had no profit from it but only loss.

כי עלית על משכבי אביך, for through your having mounted your father’s bed, (you disgraced, etc.). Reuven having been deprived of his privileges as first-born has been spelled out more clearly in Chronicles I 5,1-2) “He was the firstborn of Israel; but when he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph, son of Israel, so he is not considered as first-born in genealogy.”

יצועי עלה, the indirect mode עלה, “he mounted,” means “you were about to mount.” We find numerous instances in Scripture when a past tense is not really a past tense, such as when Avraham said to Efron that he had already given the money for the cave of Machpelah, נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני, when what he meant was that he had the money all ready and prepared. (compare Genesis 23,13). [Avraham could not have paid for the field at that time, not having wanted to buy the field nor even having made an offer to buy it. He would have considered it improper to ask someone to sell an ancestral field. Ed.]

פחז כמים The impetuosity and the precipitance with which you so hastily showed your wrath, just like water that rushes headlong in its course — therefore

אל תותר THOU SHALT NOT BE SUPERIOR— you will not receive all these many prerogatives that were proper to you. And what was this impetuosity which you displayed?

כי עלית משכבי אביך, אז חללת BECAUSE THOU WENTEST UP TO THY FATHER S PLACE OF REPOSE; THEN PROFANEDST THOU Him Who hovered over my couch — the Name of the Shechina that used to abide above my couch (Shabbat 55b and Rashi there).

פַּחַז is a noun (a segolate noun like נַחַל) and has its accent therefore on the first syllable, and the entire word (both syllables) is punctuated with Patach, for were it the past tense of a verb, half of it (the first syllable) would have been punctuated with Kametz and the other half with Patach, and its accent would have been on the last syllable.

יצועי denotes a couch, because it is spread (root יצע) with mattresses and sheets; it occurs in this sense frequently in Scripture: (Psalms 132:3) “Nor go up into the bed that is spread for me (ערש יצועי)” ; (Psalms 63:7) “When I remember thee upon my (יצועי) couch”.

Es ist zu bedauern, daß die Radix פחז nicht öfter vorkommt. Aus אנשים רקים ופוחזים sieht man ebenfalls, daß es einen Charaktermangel bedeutet (Richter 9, 4). Allein unbestimmt bleibt, welchen. Unglücklicherweise steht es hier mit Wasser zusammen. Es gibt aber kaum etwas, das so verschiedene Auffassungen zulässt wie Wasser. Wasser hat keine innere Festigkeit, somit: Haltlosigkeit wie Wasser. Wasser fließt immer nach unten, strebt nach dem Niedrigen (wofern es nicht vergeistigt zur Regenbildung in Wolken aufsteigt). Wasser ist flüssig, bewegt sich rasch vorwärts etc. Im Munde unserer Weisen heißt איפחו צלוחיתו: das Überfließen des Glases. Die allgemeinste, dem Flüssigen als solchem innewohnende Eigenschaft wäre: der Mangel an Kohäsion, somit die Haltlosigkeit. — אל תותר ist Hiphil und heißt darum wohl nicht: du darfst keinen Vorzug haben, sondern ist Prädikat zum Subjekt פחז, die Haltlosigkeit deines Charakters gestattet dir den Vorzug nicht, weil du etc., da hast du den entweiht, der etc., also: dich; es ist milde umschrieben. Indem nun aber gleichwohl hier gesagt ist: du bist der köstlichste Edelstein in meinem Schatz, bist כחי וראשית אוני, allein zum Führer der Familie taugst du nicht, der muß עז sein, der darf sich nicht durch linde, schmeichelnde Winde und auch nicht durch stürmende Orkane bewegen lassen, muss innere Charakterfestigkeit haben, nicht haltlos wie Wasser sein — so ergibt sich aus allem dem, daß denn doch der ganze Vorgang nicht jene Bedeutung haben könne, die in dem schroffen Worte וישכב sein יתר שאת ויתר עז war und כח אביו וראשית אונו liegt. Einem Sohne, der וגו׳ sollte, wird auch ein sonst leichteres Vergehen hoch angerechnet. Ein wirkliches Verbrechen hätte ein Jakob bei einem Reuben nicht so milde und leicht als פחז כמים bezeichnet.

אז חללת יצועי עלה, at that time you defiled your father’s dignity. Alternatively, Yaakov may have referred to Reuven’s act being a desecration of G’d’s honour. As an appropriate punishment, Reuven’s own status, which had been one of special honour, would be diminished accordingly.

The Name... [Rashi knows this] because “profaned” refers to Hashem. “To profane” can be said regarding Hashem, as in the expression חילול השם. But “To profane” cannot be said about a bed, and he who explains it so is mistaken.

However, because you were impetuous as water, you shall not excel, as you lost your precedence because you mounted your father’s bed, the bed of your father’ wife, which is the prime example of your impetuousness. Then you desecrated he who ascended my couch, yourself. 12 Alternatively, this is referring to the Divine Presence that resides there. 13 Others explain that the phrase “he who ascended [ ala ]” means “removed.” 14 In other words, from that day the couch, or Jacob’s honor, was removed, as he was forced to separate from Bilha due to this incident. Yet another explanation is that Jacob is saying to Reuben: You desecrated my bed and marital activities, which should have been above [ lema’ala ] and beyond your concerns; therefore, you forfeited your status as firstborn.

אז חללת יצועי עלה, “then you desecrated Him Who abode on my bed.” According to our sages, Yaakov referred to Reuven having desecrated the Presence of the Divinity, which was ever present near his father’s bed. Another explanation: your פחז, i.e. “your haste,” which was comparable to the ease with which water gushed forth from a spring, caused you to forfeit your advantage, for in your haste to ascend my couch you desecrated it thereby. Ibn Ezra understands the word עלה here as meaning “disappeared, withdrew,” as if the Torah had written עלה מעלי, “distanced himself from me.” He quotes David in Psalms 102,25 אל תעלני בחצי ימי, “do not let me die when only half my allotted lifespan is over.” Rabbi Joseph Kimchi views the paragraph as a blessing (just as the others) each of the sons receiving a blessing compatible with his personality. He includes the wish that just as he is willing to forgive Reuven for his indiscretion, so may the Lord also forgive him this sin. As a result you will be able to display the natural advantages common to a firstborn. The word שאת appears in the context of forgiveness, (Genesis 4,7 with Kayin). Yaakov described Reuven’s inability to control his libido as comparable to water gushing forth. The episode was understood by Yaakov to have been a momentary failure of reason controlling natural urges, resulting in his couch being desecrated. The word עלה belongs to the words פחז כמים instead of being part of חללת יצועי.

[who were described as] “turbulent as water” (See Genesis 49:4.)

He was separated from the people (See Mishna Maseches Yoma 1:1, “Seven days before Yom Kippur they separated the Kohein Gadol from his house and he moved to the official chambers of the Kohein Gadol.”) [who were described as] “turbulent as water” (See Genesis 49:4.)

[2] Another interpretation: "And these are the generations of Isaac. The crown of the elders are the children's children, and the glory of children are their fathers. (Proverbs 17:6) There are good children who give a crown to their fathers, and there are wicked children who take the crown from their father, as it says, "And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw..." (Genesis 9:22). But Shem and Japheth covered the nakedness of their father. (Genesis 9:23) Ishmael serves idols, but Isaac, who was the burnt offering of the Lord, gave a crown to his father. These are the generations of Isaac. Reuben, unstable as water... (Genesis 49:4) and Joseph hurried and went up to his father... (Genesis 50:4). Absalom said, "I will strike down the king alone." (2 Samuel 17:1) But Solomon rode on his own mule... (1 Kings 1:33) Hezekiah stood and added to the work, as it says, "And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, according to all that David his father had done." (2 Kings 18:3) Be the crown of the elders, children's children. These are the generations of Isaac."

[3] Another interpretation: "And the Lord saw that Leah was hated. And it shall be that the man [Jacob] will have two wives (Deuteronomy 21:15). Rabbi Berechiah said: This man is Jacob, as it is stated, 'And Jacob was a simple man' (Genesis 25:27). There were two wives, Rachel and Leah. The one [Leah] was beloved, as it is written, 'this is Leah' (Deuteronomy 21:15), and the other was unloved, as it is written, 'And the Lord saw that Leah was unloved' (Genesis 29:31). Both of them bore children for him [Jacob]. What Leah accomplished, Rachel did not accomplish, and what Rachel accomplished, Leah did not accomplish. Leah gave birth to kings, and Rachel gave birth to kings. Leah gave birth to prophets, and Rachel gave birth to prophets. Leah gave birth to judges, and Rachel gave birth to judges. And the firstborn son was to the unloved [Leah], this is Reuben, as it is stated, 'And Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben' (Genesis 29:32). And on the day that he [Jacob] bestowed his blessing, at the time when Jacob sought to depart from the world, he called his sons [to him]... 'he shall not give the son of the beloved [Rachel] precedence over the son of the unloved [Leah],' to Joseph [he gave this blessing], 'why should he [Reuben] be granted the rights of the firstborn?' (Deuteronomy 21:17) ["This is Reuben, as it is said, 'Reuben, you are my firstborn' (Genesis 49:3)]. Although I said that his impulsiveness was like water, do not withhold [praise] from him, for 'his bed is on high' (Genesis 49:4). What is 'on high'? When Moses comes, about whom it is written, 'And Moses went up' (Exodus 19:3), he will redeem you. Since Moses stood up and pleaded for him, as it is said, 'May Reuben live and not die' (Deuteronomy 33:6),. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, 'He shall live and not die,' [and thus] you [Reuben] are able to take two portions, as it is stated, 'For he [Reuben] should receive a double portion' (Deuteronomy 21:17). 'May Reuben live' - in this world; 'and not die' - in the World to Come. "For he is the beginning of my strength and so on. And it is written, 'my strength and the beginning of my might' (Genesis 49:3). Therefore, the Lord saw that Leah was hated."

Chapter (82) 83: Prophets [1] "I will assemble Jacob, all of you; I will bring together the remnant of Israel;. (Micah 2:12). Like it is said in scriptures: Assemble and listen, and complete [note: last word גומר doesn't exist in verse] (Genesis 49:2). Although the exact time of judgment day is unknown, I say to you that when you gather and assemble, at that moment you will be redeemed, as it is said, "I will surely gather all of you, O Jacob; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold, like a flock in its pasture, a noisy multitude of men" (Micah 2:12). "Reuben, you are my firstborn" (Genesis 49:3), I have not seen a blemish in you since I was born. "My might and the beginning of my strength" (same verse), since the day I was born I have been saying, "Perhaps Reuben will go up to the roof and die, or he will go down and fall." You were the beginning of my strength. "Excelling in dignity and excelling in power" (same verse), and because of the sin you committed, they took three crowns away from you and gave them to your brothers: the firstborn to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingdom to Judah. Otherwise, you would have been the firstborn. "Excelling in dignity," that is the priesthood, as it is said, "And Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things" (Exodus 28:38). "Excelling in power," I was worthy of purifying them, as it is written, "To cleanse and to sprinkle" (Leviticus 14:56). "Unstable as water" (Genesis 49:4), our rabbis have taught that three liquids are forbidden because of exposure: water, wine, and milk. If one finds exposed milk, water, or wine, they should be spilled out, just as you are unstable as water. Alternatively, "unstable" means that you acted recklessly, disgracefully, and insulted others. Just as the vessels in which liquids are poured out or stored become unusable, but the liquids themselves remain, so too you, because of your sin, should not remain. Another thing: is raging like water. Just as water purifies for everyone, so too will you purify your sins when the one who is saved from the water comes to give you blood, and who is this but Moses, as it is written, "She called his name Moses, for I drew him out of the water" (Exodus 2:10). And when does he give you blood? When you spread out your bed (Genesis 49:14), when he comes to ascend Mount Nebo, as it is written, "Let Reuben live and not die" (Deuteronomy 33:6). "Simeon and Levi are brothers" (Genesis 49:5), and not only were they brothers, but they became brothers to do justice, as it is said, "And two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, took each man his sword" (Genesis 34:25). Their weapons are instruments of violence (Genesis 49:5). The Greek language is their swords. Jacob said, "If these two tribes sit together, they will destroy the world. But I will scatter them, divide them among Jacob and disperse them among Israel" (Genesis 49:7). "Judah, your brothers will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies" (Genesis 49:8), referring to his killing of Esau. Similarly, Moses said, "His hands are his to contend with; you helped him against his foes" (Deuteronomy 33:7). "Judah, your lion's cub; from prey, my son, you have gone up" (Genesis 49:9), which is as you were named. So did your mother say, "This time I will thank God" (Genesis 29:35), and she praised God in the story of Tamar, and all the tribes praised her. "The sons of my concubine have risen against me" (Genesis 49:29), Tamar's tragedy, that she and her two sons were already doomed, as it says "they brought her out and burned her" (Genesis 38:24), but she confessed and saved herself and her two sons, just as Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were saved whole when they were thrown into the furnace. "He crouches like a lion, like a lioness--who dares to rouse him?" (Genesis 49:9), referring to David, the anointed one from you, as it says "whose heart is like that of a lion" (2 Samuel 17:10). "Forbidding the vine its fruit [and the donkey's colt to drink] (Genesis 49:11). This refers to the Messiah who will arise from you, as it is written, 'humble and riding on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey' (Zechariah 9:9). And to the flute and the finisher. Where are the Israelites forbidden and their sins atoned for? In the territory of Judah in Jerusalem. 'The scepter shall not depart from Judah' (Genesis 49:10) refers to the kingdom, 'nor a lawgiver' (ibid.) refers to the leader, 'until Shiloh comes' (ibid.) refers to the Messiah, 'and to him shall be the obedience of the people' (ibid.). 'And the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king' (Hosea 3:5), and similarly it says, 'and she ate and was satisfied, and left over' (Ruth 2:14). 'And she ate' refers to the leader, as it is written, 'and from among your brothers you shall appoint a leader' (Deuteronomy 17:15), 'and was satisfied' refers to the kingdom, and 'left over' refers to the leadership. Zebulun shall dwell by the seashore, and he shall be a haven for ships (Genesis 49:13)." "He who makes ships, goes forth and comes back and brings sufficiency to the tribe of Yissachar, who occupy themselves with Torah, as it is said, Yissachar is a strong-boned donkey, crouching among the sheepfolds. And he saw a resting place that was good, and the land that it was pleasant, and he inclined his shoulder to bear, and became a servant to tribute. (Genesis 49:14-15). Those who toil in Torah, as it is said, "And of the children of Yissachar, who had understanding of the times, to know what Yisrael ought to do; the heads of them were two hundred; and all their brothers were at their commandment." (1 Chronicles 12:33). This teaches that two hundred members of the Sanhedrin stood from the tribe of Yissachar, and all of them were with the power of Zebulun, who go out to the sea and bring them [Yissachar] what they need, as it is said, "Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out, and Yissachar, in your tents." (Deuteronomy 33:18)." "Dan will judge his people" (Genesis 49:16). This refers to rest. "Let Dan be a serpent" (ibid. v. 17) refers to Samson, who, just as a serpent bites on its own, so too Samson fought and killed on his own. Another interpretation is that just as a serpent doesn't die if it is bitten on its tail or belly, because it only dies if it is bitten on the head (as it says, "You will strike his head," Genesis 3:15), so too Samson, when he was bound with his hands and feet, and his strength was not known, as soon as his hair was cut, his strength left him (Judges 16:19). Yet, even so, he bit the heels of a horse and its rider fell backward (Genesis 49:17), as he grasped both pillars and brought the house down (Judges 16:29), and Jacob exclaimed, "I have waited for Your salvation, O Lord" (Genesis 49:18). "Gad, a troop shall tramp upon him" (ibid. v. 19) refers to Elijah, who crushed the gang of a certain ruler. "He shall provide the first part for himself" (ibid. v. 20) refers to Asher, whose land produces rich fruits and excellent oil, and he brings olive oil as an offering (ibid.). "Naphtali is a hind let loose" (ibid. v. 21) refers to all those who study the Torah and are beloved to the Almighty like deer, as it says, "A loving hind and a graceful doe" (Proverbs 5:19). "Joseph is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a fountain" (Genesis 49:22). When Pharaoh heard Joseph's interpretation of his dreams, he said that Joseph was wise and discerning (Genesis 41:39). "His eyes are darker than wine" (Genesis 49:12) refers to Joseph's children, whom the other tribes did not begrudge, and the children of Joseph say to Joshua, "We are a numerous people and God has blessed us until now" (Joshua 17:14). Joshua said to them, "This is what you say, and yet you are not afraid of the evil eye?" They replied, "Jacob our father already prayed for us that the evil eye should not rule over us, as it is said, 'Against me [Jacob] was the evil eye' (Genesis 49:27), and Benjamin is compared to a wolf that tears (Genesis 49:27). In the Temple, which was built within its borders, they would sacrifice there one lamb, etc. (Numbers 28:4). Once he blessed each person according to their needs, he made them into tribes, as it is said, 'These are the tribes of Israel' (Genesis 49:28). He said to them, "Behold, I have blessed you," as it is said, 'And this is what their father spoke to them and blessed them' (Genesis 49:28). A faithful man will come and seal my blessings, and who is this? It is Moses, as it is said, 'And this is the blessing with which Moses blessed' (Deuteronomy 33:1)."

“Reuben, you are my firstborn” – Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] would say [an interpretation] of this as praise and [an interpretation] as criticism. You are firstborn, and Esau is firstborn. “Esau went to the field to hunt game [to bring]” (Genesis 27:5) – if he found, fine; if not, “to bring” from what he stole or took by force. But you, “Reuben went during the days of wheat harvest [and found mandrakes in the field and brought them to his mother Leah]” (Genesis 30:14). (Reuven took mandrakes that were ownerless and not from what belonged to others (see Bereshit Rabba 72:2), unlike Esau.) “My strength, and the first of my potency” – these are the vanguard in the battle. “Greater honor and greater power” – “their faces were like the faces of lions” (I Chronicles 12:9). (This is written regarding the Gadites, but since the Gadites and Reubenites both formed the vanguard in the conquest of Canaan, it is true of the Reubenites as well (Matnot Kehuna). ) He would say [an interpretation] about this as criticism – “Reuben, you are my firstborn” – you are firstborn and I am firstborn. (Jacob bought the birthright from Esau.) I, at the age of eighty-four years old, had never seen a drop of seminal emission, (That is, until Jacob married Leah and fathered Reuben. The midrash assumes that Reuben was conceived the first time Jacob had relations with Leah. ) but you: “[Reuben] went and lay with Bilha” (Genesis 35:22). “My strength, and the first of my potency” – the first of my toil and the first of my travail. (He was the one with whom Jacob first experienced the travail of raising children.) “Greater honor and greater power” – the birthright was yours, the priesthood was yours, the kingship was yours, but now that you sinned, the birthright was given to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingship to Judah. Rabbi Aḥa said: The birthright was not yours. Is it not so that Jacob went to Laban only for Rachel? All the furrows that I plowed in your mother; was it not in Rachel that they should have been plowed? (This is a euphemism for marital relations. Reuben was conceived the first time Jacob had relations with Leah, when he thought she was Rachel, and therefore by right the firstborn should have been from Rachel (Nezer HaKodesh). ) Now, the birthright has returned to its owner. "Impetuous as water, you shall not excel; because you mounted your father's bed; then you desecrated, he who ascended my couch” (Genesis 49:4). “Impetuous as water, you shall not excel” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua: Rabbi Eliezer said: You were impetuous [paḥazta], you sinned [ḥatata], you engaged in harlotry [zanita]. (The Hebrew term for impetuous, paḥaz, is an acronym for paḥazta, ḥatata, zanita.) Rabbi Yehoshua said: You rebelled [parakta ol], you desecrated [ḥilalta] my couch, your evil inclination stirred [za] within you. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said: You trampled [pasata] the law, you forfeited [ḥavta] your birthright, you became a stranger [zar] vis-à-vis your gifts. They said: Even now, we still need the Moda’i. Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i came and explained: You shuddered [zata], you trembled [ḥaradta], the sin flew [paraḥ] from upon your head. (Reuben shuddered and trembled with remorse for his sin, and therefore was forgiven (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Pinḥas said: You acted like those impetuous ones who break their shins in the water. (They leap before they look.) “As water” – the Rabbis say: You sinned through water, (Water in the sense of liquid, a reference to semen.) let the one who was drawn from water come and draw you near: “May Reuben live and not die” (Deuteronomy 33:6). (This verse was stated by Moses, who was so called because he was drawn from the water (see Exodus 2:10). ) “As water” – just as water is released from place to place, so, you have been released. (Just as water flows, your sin has flowed away from you, i.e., you have been relieved of liability. Alternatively, the implication is: Your privileges have been taken from you (Matnot Kehuna). ) Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says: One does not make a ritual bath of wine or of oil, but rather of water; so, you made yourself a ritual bath of water and you purified yourself in it. (Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i is of the opinion that Reuben sinned only in thought but not in deed, as he did not carry out his sinful thoughts. Therefore, his thoughts of sincere repentance restored him to a state of purity, as though he had immersed in a ritual bath (Etz Yosef). ) “You shall not excel [totar]” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said this: Nothing was relinquished [vitarta] for you. (You have not been absolved from punishment. This is derived from the fact that totar and vitarta are derived from the same root in Hebrew. ) Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says: There will be nothing remaining [vitaron] for you from your sin. “Because you mounted [alita]” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: Because you mounted in its plain sense. (They interpret the phrase “because you mounted your father’s bed” in the plain sense as indicating that Reuben literally sinned with Bilha. ) Rabbi Elazar said: Because you mounted [alita] (He interprets alita to mean “you elevated [he’eleita],” meaning that Reuben brought about benefit regarding his father’s bed. This occurred in the incident of the mandrakes, which led to the birth of Issachar.) – where? In the case of the mandrakes. “Your father’s bed [mishkevei avikha]” – Rabbi Berekhya said: It is not written here: Your father’s bed [mishkav] , but rather, “your father’s beds [mishkevei]” (The term mishkevei, generally translated “bed,” is actually a plural term, such that a literal translation would be “beds.” ) – the bed of Bilha and the bed of Zilpa. (Accordingly, not only did Reuben literally sin, but he did so with Zilpa as well as with Bilha. ) Rabbi Abbahu, and some say Rabbi Yaakov, in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyya Rabba, and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: We learned: One who is suspect in some matter neither judges in its regard nor testifies in its regard. (Mishna Bekhorot 4:10. ) Is it possible that he is destined to be one of the six tribes that were standing on Mount Eval and saying: “Cursed is one who lies with his father’s wife” (Deuteronomy 27:20), and he performed this very act? Rather, he was defending his mother’s honor. All the days that Rachel was alive, her bed was situated alongside the bed of Jacob our patriarch. When Rachel died, Jacob our patriarch took Bilha’s bed and placed it alongside his bed. [Reuben] said: Is it not enough that my mother was jealous during her sister’s lifetime, that she must be so even after her death? He rose and rearranged the beds. Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon disagrees with this and [says that] Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi [said] in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: This is analogous to one who was suspected of selling teruma as non-sacred produce. (Teruma, which could be eaten only by priests and the members of their households, and only in a state of ritual purity, would command a much cheaper price than non-sacred produce. ) They investigated him and inspected, but did not find any substance to these claims, and they appointed him in charge of setting prices in the marketplace. “Then you desecrated” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: “Then you desecrated” – in its plain sense. “Ascended” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, both of them said: You ascended from your sin. Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i said: You ascended from your gifts. (Numerous commentaries suggest that the text should read that according to Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua, “you ascended from your gifts,” meaning that due to his sin, Reuben lost out on the priestly gifts, and Rabbi Eliezer HaModa’i says, “you ascended from your sin,” meaning that Reuben repented and achieved atonement for his sin. ) The Rabbis say: I am neither distancing you nor drawing you near. Instead I am leaving you in loose abeyance until Moses, in whose regard it is written: “And Moses ascended to God” (Exodus 19:3), comes, and does with you what he perceives to be correct. When Moses came, he began to draw him near: “May Reuben live” (Deuteronomy 33:6). The Rabbis say: The same was true of the congregation of Koraḥ, . (See the end of section 2. )

“Gather, and I will tell you” – he appointed them as elders, just as it is stated: “Gather to Me seventy men of the elders of Israel” (Numbers 11:16). “Gather” is stated, and “assemble and hear” is stated – he informed them that they would be exiled twice. “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my strength, and the first of my potency; greater honor and greater power. Impetuous as water, you shall not excel [totar]; because you mounted your father’s bed; then you desecrated, he who ascended my couch” (Genesis 49:3–4). “Reuben, you are my firstborn” – you are my firstborn, you are similar to me. I lived eighty years and did not see even one drop of semen. “My strength and the first of my potency” – you were my first drop. “Greater honor and greater power” – three crowns were in your possession: priesthood, kingship, and the birthright. Priesthood, as it is written: “Greater honor [se’et],” and se’et is nothing other than priesthood, as it is written: “Aaron lifted [vayisa] his hands” (Leviticus 9:22). Kingship, as it is written: “And greater power,” and power is nothing other than kingship, as it is written: “He will give strength to His king” (I Samuel 2:10). The birthright, as it is written: “Reuben, you are my firstborn.” And you lost them. What caused you [to lose them]? “Impetuous [paḥaz] as water, you shall not excel.” For what is it an acronym? Rabbi Eliezer says: You were impetuous [paḥazta], you cast [hishlakhta] (Although hishlakhta begins with a heh whereas paḥazta has a ḥet, since these sounds are produced in a similar way and sound similar, they are considered interchangeable for homiletical purposes (Etz Yosef; see Rabbi David Luria). ) the yoke from upon your neck, your evil inclination moved [za] against you. Rabbi Yehoshua says: You were impetuous [paḥazta], you sinned [ḥatata], you engaged in licentiousness [zanita]. Rabbi Levi said: Transpose paḥaz – you trembled [zata], you became anxious [ḥaradta], and the sin departed [paraḥ] from you. (He did not actually engage in relations with Bilha, and he repented even for the thought of doing so.) Alternatively, paḥaz – you trampled [pasata] the law, you profaned [ḥilalta] your birthright, you became a stranger [zar]. (The term stranger is used as a contrast to priesthood; a non-priest is known as a stranger [zar]. ) “As water” – what is “as water”? If a person pours a flask of water and it spills, nothing at all remains [mishtayer] in it, but if it was of oil or of honey, something would remain in it. That is why it says: “As water you shall not totar. “Because you mounted [alita] your father’s bed” – when you brought mandrakes and your mother was saying to her sister: “Was the taking of my husband insignificant” (Genesis 30:15), you caused my bed to be elevated [alita] and my couch to be desecrated. (This view interprets the term “mounted [alita]” to mean elevated, in a positive sense. When Reuben brought mandrakes to his mother (Genesis 30:14), Rachel asked for some of them. Leah responded: “Was the taking of my husband insignificant that you would take also of my son’s mandrakes?” and Rachel responded: “Therefore he will lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes” (Genesis 30:15). In this exchange, Leah was considered to have respected and elevated Jacob’s bed and Rachel was considered to have denigrated it (Etz Yosef; see Bereshit Rabba 98:4). ) Because you caused it to be desecrated, you will be a pariah until Moses, in whose regard it is written: “Moses ascended” (Exodus 19:3), will come and release you and draw you near. That is what is written: “May Reuben live” (Deuteronomy 33:6). (This was stated by Moses. )

(Deut. 33:1:) AND THIS IS THE BLESSING. This text is related (to Prov. 31:29): MANY DAUGHTERS HAVE DONE VALIANTLY, BUT YOU SURPASS THEM ALL. This is the blessing of Moses, (Tanh., Deut. 11:1; PRK 31:11.) in respect to which you should note that in the case of the earlier generations each and every one blessed his generation, but compared to all of them none was like the blessing of Moses. Noah blessed his children, but it contained a divergence. He blessed one and cursed another. (Gen. 9:27:) MAY GOD ENLARGE (YPT) JAPHETH (YPT); but he said (vs. 25:) CURSED BE CANAAN. Isaac blessed Jacob. There was strife in it, in that he said to Esau (in Gen. 27:35): YOUR BROTHER CAME WITH DECEIT; and it is stated (in vs. 41): THEN ESAU HATED JACOB <…, AND ESAU SAID IN HIS HEART: LET THE DAYS OF MORNING FOR MY FATHER COME, AND I WILL KILL MY BROTHER JACOB>. Jacob blessed the tribes, but there was strife among them, in that he said to Reuben (in Gen. 49:4): UNSTABLE AS WATER; and similarly (in vs. 5): SIMEON AND LEVI . And from where did each and every one of the patriarchs learn to bless his generation? [They learned] from the Holy One. When he created Adam, he blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 1:28): THEN GOD BLESSED THEM; [and (The other part of this bracket is several lines below.) the world was maintained by that blessing, until the generation of the flood came, and they cancelled it out, as stated (in Gen. 6:7): AND THE LORD SAID: I WILL BLOT OUT THE HUMANITY WHICH I CREATED. When Noah left the ark, the Holy One saw that this blessing had passed from them. He blessed Noah and his children anew, as stated (in Gen. 9:1): THEN GOD BLESSED NOAH AND HIS CHILDREN. The world was maintained by this blessing, until Abraham came into the world. Then the Holy One added one blessing for him, as stated (in Gen. 12:2): FOR I WILL MAKE YOU INTO A GREAT NATION…. When Abraham came, the Holy One said: It is not a practice worthy of me, that I should be obliged to bless my creatures. Rather take note! I am handing over the blessings to Abraham and to his seed, so that for all who issue a blessing through him, I am placing my seal upon , as stated (in vs. 2, cont.): AND SO BECOME A BLESSING. (vs. 3:) I WILL BLESS THOSE WHO BLESS YOU…. What is the meaning of I WILL BLESS THOSE WHO BLESS YOU. The Holy One said: Take note. I am handing over the blessings to ALL WHOM YOU BLESS, and I am sealing through you. But if from then on the blessings were {spoken} [handed over] to Abraham, why did he not bless Isaac? It was because Abraham saw that Esau would issue from him. He said: If I bless Isaac, then Esau will be blessed, and Isaac will be found lacking. A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To the head of a household that had a vineyard. (See Gen. R. 61:6; Numb. R. 11:2; M. Pss. 1:5; also Matthew 13:24–30.) : He gave it to a tenant. And in that vineyard was a tree of life, but it had overgrown a tree having a deadly poison. Now he did not know what to do. He said: If I cultivate that vineyard, then the tree having a deadly poison will flourish; but if I do not cultivate that vineyard, then the tree of life will die. So what shall I do? I will bear with that vineyard until the owner of the vineyard comes. Then he may do what he wants with his vineyard. (Cf. Matthew 13:24–30.) And so also did Abraham say: If I bless Isaac, Esau will end up being blessed and Jacob will lose out. Look here. It is simply that he is leaving him alone until the Holy One comes, when he will deal with what belongs to him.] Jacob came and received five blessing: two from his father, one from Abraham, one from the angel, and one from the Holy One. (Cf. Gen. R. 94:5.) : Two from his father, according to what is stated (in Gen. 27:33): THEN ISAAC TREMBLED (when he realized he had blessed Jacob instead of Esau). Why TREMBLED? R. Eleazar ben Padat said: because he saw Gehinnom open for Esau. He wanted to say: Cursed. He repented and added a blessing when he said (ibid., end): HE ALSO SHALL BE BLESSED. Here is one blessing. A second (is in Gen. 28:1): SO ISAAC CALLED JACOB AND BLESSED HIM. [The blessing of Abraham (is in Gen. 28:4): AND MAY HE GRANT YOU THE BLESSING OF ABRAHAM…; the blessing of an angel is (in Gen. 32:30 [29]): AND HE (the angel) BLESSED HIM THERE; and the blessings of the Holy One (in Gen. 35:9): NOW GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN…, AND BLESSED HIM.] When Jacob came to bless the tribes, he blessed them with the five blessing that he had in hand and added one blessing to them, as stated (in Gen. 49:28): ALL THESE ARE THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL, WHEN HE BLESSED THEM, EACH ONE WITH HIS OWN BLESSING IS HOW HE BLESSED THEM. (The midrash notes that the words, HE BLESSED THEM, occur twice and interprets the verse to mean that one blessing, the fivefold blessing he had received, was for the tribes as a group while the other blessing was a specific blessing for each tribe.) When Moses came to bless Israel, he added a seventh blessing to them. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 33:1): AND THIS IS THE BLESSING. < According to another interpretation, Moses made> an addition to the blessings with which Balaam had blessed Israel, (Cf. PRK 31(suppl. 1):4) since it was fitting for him to bless with seven blessings corresponding to the seven altars ; (On these altars, see Numb. 23:1, 14, 29.) but only blessed them with three, as stated (in Numb. 24:10): BUT HERE YOU HAVE EVEN BLESSED THEM THESE THREE [TIMES]. The Holy One said to him: You are wicked. Your eye is too jaundiced for you to bless them. Moreover, I am not putting the power in your hand to finish your blessing over Israel. Moses will come, whose eye is fair. Then he will bless Israel, and it is about him that Solomon has said (in Prov. 22:9): HE THAT HAS A BENEVOLENT EYE SHALL BE BLESSED (YBRK). Do not read YBRK SHALL BE BLESSED, but SHALL BLESS. This refers to Moses our Master whose eyes were fair when he blessed Israel. He also blessed them with four blessings:

(Gen. 49:4:) UNSTABLE AS WATER, YOU SHALL NO LONGER EXCEL. What is the meaning of AS WATER? R. Jeremiah and R. Nathan differ. One said < it was > to his discredit, and the other said < it was > to his credit. What does it mean < when interpreted > to his discredit? AS WATER. You have left yourself nothing. Instead < you became > AS WATER. How so? When one empties a cask of honey, he leaves a little in it. When one pours with water in it, he leaves nothing in it. So you have left yourself nothing of merit; instead < you are as > UNSTABLE AS WATER. But the other said < it was > to his credit. What is the meaning of AS WATER? Anyone who empties honey or oil leaves a little. You did not leave yourself sin, but were AS WATER. Just as the water cleanses, so also have you been cleansed.

Another interpretation (of Gen. 49:4): UNSTABLE AS WATER. The word (UNSTABLE) is an acronym. (Gk.: notarikon.) R. Eliezer said: What is the meaning of UNSTABLE (PHZ)? O wretched one (pahit), you have sinned (hatit); You have committed adultery (zanit). (Gen. R. 97, New Version, on 49:4 (= p. 1205 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); cf. 98(99):4; 99 (another version):6 (= p. 1277 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); Shab. 55b.) You have wasted your strength.

[Another interpretation (of Gen. 49:4): UNSTABLE AS WATER.] Our masters have taught (in Ter. 8:4): THREE LIQUIDS BECOME FORBIDDEN THROUGH BEING UNCOVERED: WATER, WINE, AND MILK. If wine is found uncovered, then one is sorry about it when he pours it out; but in the case of water, if it is found uncovered, one is not sorry for it if he pours it out. So you have done with all the crowns which belonged to me. You have thrown them away AS WATER. < You are as > UNSTABLE AS WATER. When Simeon and Levi came in to Jacob, he reproached (Gk.: kentroun, i.e., “to strike with a goad.”) them. He said (in Gen. 49:5): SIMEON AND LEVI ARE BROTHERS, WEAPONS OF VIOLENCE ARE THEIR MEKHEROT (The meaning of this word is obscure, but the singular, mekherah, resembles the Greek machaira, which means “sword”; and such a meaning fits the context of the midrash. So Tanh., Gen. 12:9; Gen. R. 99 (another version):7 (= p. 1278 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); PRE 38 (in the Amsterdam and Prague editions). The Greek parallel to such an ancient Hebrew word may be due to the fact that swords were common objects of trade.) What are MEKHEROT? WEAPONS OF VIOLENCE.

(Deut. 33:1:) “And this is the blessing.” This text is related (to Prov. 31:29), “Many daughters have done valiantly, but you surpass them all.” This is the blessing of Moses, (PRK 31:11.) in respect to which you should note that in the case of the earlier generations each and every one blessed his generation, but there was none was like the blessing of Moses. Noah blessed his children, but it contained a divergence, as he blessed one and cursed another, as stated (Gen. 9:27,) “May God enlarge (ypt) Japheth (ypt) [...]; and let Canaan be a slave to them.” Isaac blessed Jacob, but there was strife in it. It is so stated (in Gen. 28:4), “May He give you the blessing of Abraham, but he said to Esau (in Gen. 27:35), “Your brother came with deceit”; and it is stated (in vs. 41), “Then Esau hated Jacob […, and Esau said in his heart, ‘Let the days of mourning for my father come, and I will kill my brother Jacob’].” Jacob blessed the tribes, but there was strife among them, in that he rebuked Reuben, as stated (in Gen. 49:4), “Unstable as water”; and similarly (in vs. 5), “Simeon and Levi [are brothers; weapons of violence are their swords].” And from where did each and every one of the patriarchs learn to bless his generation? [They learned it] from the Holy One, blessed be He. When he created Adam, He blessed him, as stated (in Gen. 1:27-28), “male and female. Then [God] blessed them.” And the world was maintained by that blessing, until the generation of the flood came, and they cancelled it out, as stated (in Gen. 6:7), “And the Lord said, “I will blot out the humanity which I created.” When Noah left the ark, the Holy One, blessed be He, saw that this blessing had passed from them. He blessed Noah and his children anew, as stated (in Gen. 9:1), “Then God blessed Noah and his children.” The world was maintained by this blessing, until Abraham came into the world, and He added blessing, as stated (in Gen. 12:2), “For I will make you into a great nation.” Once Abraham came, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “It is not honorable for Me, that I should be obliged to bless My creatures. Rather take note! I am handing over the blessings to Abraham and to his seed, so that for all who they issue a blessing, I am placing my seal upon [those blessings], as stated (in vs. 2, cont.), ‘[I will bless you and magnify your name] and so become a blessing.’” (Vs. 3:) “I will bless those who bless you….” What is the meaning of “I will bless?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Take note. I am handing over the blessings to all whom you bless, and I am sealing [them] through you.” But if from then on the blessings were [handed over] to Abraham, why did he not bless Isaac? It was because Abraham saw that Esau would issue from him. He said, “If I bless Isaac, then Esau will be blessed, and Isaac will be found lacking.” A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To the head of a household that had a vineyard, (See Gen. R. 61:6; Numb. R. 11:2; M. Pss. 1:5.) [and] gave it to a tenant. And in that vineyard was a tree of life, but it had overgrown a tree having a deadly poison. Now he did not know what to do. He said, “If I cultivate that vineyard, then the tree having a deadly poison will flourish; but if I do not cultivate that vineyard, then the tree of life will die. So what shall I do? I will bear with that vineyard until the owner of the vineyard comes. Then he may do what he wants with his vineyard.” And so also did Abraham say, “If I bless Isaac, Esau will end up being blessed and Jacob will lose out. Rather look here. I will leave him alone until the Holy One, blessed be He, comes, when He will deal with what belongs to Him.” Jacob came and received five blessings: two from his father, one from Abraham, one from the angel, and one from the Holy One, blessed be He. (Cf. Gen. R. 94:5.) From his father, as stated (in Gen. 27:33), “Then Isaac trembled (when he realized he had blessed Jacob instead of Esau). Why “trembled?” R. Eliezer ben Pedat said, “[He did so] because he saw Gehinnom open in front of him. He wanted to say, ‘Cursed will be [Jacob.’ Instead,] he went back [on it], and added blessing [to it], when he said (ibid., end), ‘he also shall be blessed.’” Here is one [blessing]. A second (is in Gen. 28:1), “So Isaac called Jacob and blessed him.” The blessing of the Holy One, blessed be He, (is in Gen. 35:9), “Now God appeared unto Jacob [… and blessed him].” The blessing of Abraham (is in Gen. 28:4), “And may He grant you the blessing of Abraham.” And the blessing of an angel is (in Gen. 32:30), “and he (the angel) blessed him there.” When Jacob came to bless the tribes, he blessed them with the five blessings that he had in hand and added one blessing to them, as stated (in Gen. 49:28), “All these are the tribes of Israel, [twelve in number, and this is what their father spoke to them when he blessed them, each one with his own blessing is how he blessed them].” (The midrash notes that the words, HE BLESSED THEM, occur twice and interprets the verse to mean that one blessing, the fivefold blessing he had received, was for the tribes as a group while the other blessing was a specific blessing for each tribe.) When Moses came to bless Israel, he added a seventh blessing to them. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing.” [According to another interpretation, Moses made] an addition to the blessings with which Balaam had blessed Israel, (Cf. PRK 31(suppl. 1):4.) since it was fitting for him to bless them with seven blessings corresponding to the seven altars [he had built]; (On these altars, see Numb. 23:1, 14, 29.) but [Balaam] only blessed them with three, as stated (in Numb. 24:10), “but here you have even blessed them these three times.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “O wicked one, your eye is too jaundiced for you to bless them. Moreover, I am not putting the power in your hand to finish your blessing over Israel. Moses will come, whose eye is fair; then he will bless Israel.” And it is about him that Solomon has said (in Prov. 22:9), “He that has a benevolent eye shall be blessed (ybrk).” Do not read “ybrk [with vowels meaning] shall be blessed,” but [with vowels meaning] “shall bless.” This refers to Moses our master whose eyes were fair when he blessed Israel, such that he blessed them with [the other] four blessings: The first is (in Exod. 39:43), “When Moses saw all the work […] he blessed them.” The second is (in Lev. 9:23), “Then Moses and Aaron came unto the tent of meeting; and when they came out, they blessed the people….” The third is (in Deut. 1:11), “May the Lord God of your ancestors add [to your numbers a thousand times more than you are and bless you].” The fourth is (here in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing.” It is therefore stated (in Prov. 31:29), “Many daughters have done valiantly, but you surpass them all.”(Deut. 33:1:) And this is the blessing.” It was fitting for Moses to bless Israel because he had constantly risked his life for them. (PRK 31(suppl. 1):12.) For this reason, it is stated (in Deut. 33:1), “And this is the blessing [that Moses blessed... the Children of Israel].” (Deut. 33:1:) “The man of God (the Power).” If it says, “man,” why does it say, “God,” and if it says, “God,” why does it say, “man?” It is simply that at the time he fled from in front of Pharaoh, he was a man, but at the time he trounced [the Egyptians], he was a power. Another interpretation: At the time that he went up to the firmament, he was a man; in front of the angels that were all fire, he was a man. But at the time he came down, he was a power. Before he went up to the firmament, he was a man, as he would eat and drink. But all the time that he was there, he was a power, as stated (in Exod. 34:20), “and they were afraid to approach him.”

R. Levi reversed the letters of the word pahaz: The zayin stands for za’ata (“you did recoil), the heh for haradata (“you did tremble”), and parah het (“your sin has flown from you”). Another comment on pahaz. Pasata (“you trampled on the law”), hillalta (“you have degraded your birthright”), zar (“you have made yourself a stranger like water). What is the meaning of like water? If a man pours water from a flask nothing remains, but if there is oil in the flask, and it is poured out, there is a residue in the bottle. Therefore, it says: Unstable like water, have thou not the excellency (Gen. 49:4).

Variantly: "Reuven shall live for his act with Joseph (viz. Bereshith 37:21), and he shall (therefore,) not die for his act with Bilhah. R. Chanina b. Gamliel says: Merit is not exchanged for liability, nor liability for merit — except for the instance of Reuven (above) and that of David (viz. II Samuel 16:13) … And the sages say: Neither merit for liability nor liability for merit, but mitzvoth are rewarded and transgressions are punished. And what is the import of "Reuven shall live and he shall not die"? That he repented of his deed. R. Shimon b. Gamliel says: Reuven was far removed from that sin (of cohabitation with Bilhah) and he did not descend to that act. Is it possible that he would stand at the head of the tribes on Mount Eival and say (Devarim 27:20) "Cursed be he who lives with father's wife," having descended to such an act! What, then, is the intent of (Bereshith 49:4) "For you went up on your father's bed?" He was solicitous of his mother's honor (viz. Shabbath 55b).

וישכב את בלהה, “he slept with Bilhah.” This is not to be understood literally, but he invaded her privacy and messed up the linen on her bedstead, or simply moved her bed from its normal position. This was a protest against her trying to replace Rachel. Reuven, Leah’s oldest son, felt that now that Rachel had died, his mother should outrank any of the other wives of his father. Rashi points out that this is not the only instance when the Torah to make its point exaggerates the indiscretion committed by some people, or when it rounds up numbers. An example of such an exaggeration quoted is the injury that the angel had caused Yaakov in their nocturnal struggle. He had not made Yaakov’s hip joint useless, but had only dislocated it. (32,26) וישמע ישראל, “Israel heard about this;” about Reuven’s indiscretion. ויהיו בני יעקב שנים עשר, “the sons of Yaakov remained 12.” Yaakov had no more sons after this. The reason was that he no longer carried on marital relations with any of his wives. Our sages derive this from the line: אז חללת יצועי עלה, “then you desecrated Him who abode on my bed.” (Genesis 49,4) Yaakov meant that ever since the sanctity which had distinguished his marital bed had ceased to exist and been profaned. (Compare Rash’bam on that verse) The reason why here we have the words: וישמע ישראל, “Israel heard,” (instead of “Yaakov” heard) is so that when you read that verse in chapter 49 you will not ask: ‘how did Yaakov ever find out about Reuven’s indiscretion?’An alternate interpretation: the reason why the line that Yaakov’s sons were and remained 12, is inserted here where reference is made to Reuven’s indiscretion, is in order not to allow anyone to think that possibly some of Yaakov’s sons might not have been his but Reuven’s, but it refers to the most recently born son born for him by Rachel. Yaakov together with all of his twelve sons returned to their father’s home.

Sforno suggests that the Deuteronomy prohibition applies only when the transfer of the firstborn’s rights happens because the father favours one wife over another. It does not apply when the firstborn has been guilty of a sin that would warrant forfeiting his legal privilege. That is what Jacob meant when, on his deathbed, he said to Reuben: “Unstable as water, you will no longer be first, for you went up onto your father’s bed, onto my couch and defiled it” (Gen. 49:4). This is stated explicitly in the book of Chronicles which says that “Reuben…was the firstborn, but when he defiled his father’s marriage bed, his rights as firstborn were given to the sons of Joseph son of Israel” (I Chr. 5:1).

Unstable as water, you will not excel, for you went up onto your father’s bed, onto my couch and defiled it. (Gen. 49:4)

ויאמר צדקה ממני, he (Yehudah) said: “she is more righteous than I am. ”G–d’s methods when sitting in judgment cannot be compared to the way a human judge deals with offenders. When a human judge tries a case, and the accused party admits his guilt, the judge proceeds to carry out the penalty for the offence in question, having proven that he did not act arbitrarily. In other words, if the offence carries the death penalty, it is carried out forthwith. According to Proverbs 28,13, this is not G–d’s way of dealing with the guilty party Solomon describes it as: ומודה ועוזב ירוחם, “if he confesses and abandons sin, he will experience mercy.” As soon as Yehudah’s brother Reuven heard about how he had publicly acknowledged being the father of Tamar’s unborn children, he himself acknowledged his guilt in defiling his father’ couch. (Yaakov’s words in Genesis 49,4) This is also what Eliphas said to Job (Job 15,18) אשר חכמים יגידו ולא כחדו מאבותם, “that which the wise men have transmitted from their fathers and have not withheld it.” The wise men that Job referred to are none other than Yehudah and Reuven. This is why the descendants of those two sons of Yaakov were the only ones whose territory was never invaded by aliens [prior to the building of Solomon’s Temple? Ed.] (compare Moses’ blessing in Deuteronomy 33, 6-7)

The Torah is not telling us that Jacob did wrong. There are all sorts of explanations that reconcile his behaviour with later law. Jacob did not keep the Torah except in the land of Israel (Ramban), and his gift of a double portion to Joseph happened in Egypt. We are forbidden to transfer the birthright on grounds of love alone, but we may do so if we believe that the firstborn has significant character deficiencies, which Jacob believed to be true of Reuben (Gen. 49:3–4; Abarbanel). But the law is telling us something very profound indeed. Love is the highest of emotions. We are commanded to love God with all our heart, soul, and might. But it is also, in family contexts, fraught with danger. Love ruined Jacob’s life, time and again: in his relationship with Esau (Isaac loved Esau, Rebecca loved Jacob), in the relationship between Leah and Rachel, and in the relationship between Joseph and his brothers. Love brings joy. It also brings tears. It brings some people close, but makes others feel distanced, rejected.

LET REUBEN LIVE. Moses starts with the first-born, for this is the proper practice. He does not mention Simeon because of the incident of Baal-peor, (See Num. 25:1-9.) for those who served Baalpeor were from the tribe of Simeon. (See Num. 25:14.) Their number (Their drop in number.) proves this. (When the tribe of Simeon was counted in the second year after the Exodus, they numbered 59,300. (Num. 1:23). When they were counted following the incident of Baal-peor, they numbered 22,200 (Num. 26:14). In other words, the number of the tribe was diminished by 37,100.) Also, their prince was killed. (Num. 25:14.) It is also possible that Moses followed in the footsteps of Jacob, (On his deathbed. See Gen. 49:5-7.) who did not bless Simeon and Levi. The tribe of Levi was blessed out of respect for Aaron. Simeon had no one as great as Aaron. (Hence they were not blessed.) Should one who disputes argue, “Why did Moses bless Reuben?” (When Jacob apparently did not bless him. See Gen. 49:3,4.) The answer is that Jacob blessed Reuben. The blessing was have not thou the excellency (Gen. 49:4). (Of dignity and power.) The meaning of the latter is that Reuben shall be like one of his brothers. Moses mentions Judah after Reuben (Even though Levi was born before Judah.) because he was in charge of a standard (For committing harlotry with a Midianite princess. The point is that the leader of the tribe of Simeon as well as a large proportion of the sinners at Baal-peor were Simeonites. Hence Moses did not bless them. See Num. 2:3-9.) and he was the first to lead in battle. Next Levi and then Benjamin are mentioned (After Judah.) because the Levites dwelled in Jerusalem, which was situated between Judah and Benjamin. Scripture clearly states this. (See Josh. 15:8.) Moses then mentions the tribe of Joseph so as not to delay naming him. He had already mentioned his younger brother. (Benjamin.) He next mentioned Zebulun because he waged war. (Zebulun is a people that jeoparded their lives unto death (Jud. 5:18).) He then mentioned Issachar. (Who, like Zebulun, was a son of Leah.) After Moses finished mentioning the children of the wives, he commenced with Gad, (That is, he commenced the listing of the children of the handmaids with Gad.) who camped among the standard of the children of the wives. (He camped under the banner of Reuben. See Num. 2:14.) Moses then mentions Dan, who was in charge of a standard. (See Num. 2:25.) He then mentioned Naphtali because he was older than Asher. (See Gen. 30:8-13.)

על רצון על מזבחי═על רצון מזבחי With acceptance on my altar. (Usually one preposition is connected with several nouns, but in one and the same meaning; here this is not the case. על רצון means with acceptance, or for acceptance; על מזבחי upon my altar. But, in fact, the repetition of the preposition is not required here at all, since עלה governs also the accusative; comp. Gen. 49:4; Num. 13:17.)

And on all hills, etc. And all the hills, where vineyards have formerly been carefully dressed, will now again be prepared; for there will be no thorns, and God will give such a blessing on the vineyards of the mountains, that people will send the cattle there; comp. He bindeth his foal to the vine (Gen. 49:4). The prophet says that from one cow and two sheep there will be obtained a plentiful supply of milk; and the vineyards of the mountains, that will alone remain undamaged, will enjoy a boundless blessing from the Almighty.

At this point, however, the text does a strange thing. It says, “­Reuben went in and slept with [or changed the sleeping arrangement of] his father’s concubine Bilhah, and Israel heard of it” and then signals a paragraph break in the middle of the sentence. The sentence ends: “Jacob had twelve sons.” This is very rare indeed. What it suggests is an audible silence. Communication had completely broken down between Jacob and Reuben. If the sages are correct in their interpretation, then this is one of the greatest tragedies in the whole of Genesis. Jacob clearly believed that Reuben had slept with his concubine Bilhah. He cursed him for it on his deathbed: “Unstable as water, you will not excel, for you went up onto your father’s bed, onto my couch and defiled it” (Gen. 49:4).

וישכב את בלהה, “he slept with Bilhah.” Our sages in Shabbat 55, describe this act as בלבל מצעו של אביו, “he disturbed the couch of his father.” When his father referred to the incident on his deathbed (Genesis 49,4), he too used the same expression, saying אז חללת יצועי עלה, “then you desecrated Him who mounted my couch.” Yaakov did not criticize Reuven for sleeping with Bilhah but for mounting the couch on which his father used to sleep with. her. You find something similar in Samuel I 2,22 where the sons of the High Priest Eli are accused of sleeping with the women (married women) who performed certain tasks at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. Eli reprimanded his sons after the rumors had come to his attention. The Talmud in Shabbat there also explains that this verse is not to be taken at face value but that what the sons of Eli did made them subject to such accusations being leveled against them. What is described there as the severe sin of the sons of Eli is the fact that they delayed offering the bird-offerings of women who had either been ritually impure through having given birth or had suffered the disease known as זבה. By delaying these offerings, these women’s husbands were effectively prevented from sleeping with their wives until the matter of the offerings had been taken care of. The prophet Samuel accounts this for the sons of Eli as if they had prevented these husbands from sleeping with their wives because they themselves had slept with these wives.

אלה יעמדו לברך. “These are to stand (on Mount Gerizim) to bless the people.” Our sages (in Sotah 32) state that the blessing consisted of: “Blessed be the man who has not made a hewn image, etc.,” whereas the curse consisted of the words spelled out in verses 15-26. Six tribes whose ancestors were sons of either Leah or Rachel stood on the mountain facing which the blessing was pronounced, whereas the sons of Zilpah and Bilhah as well as Reuven and Zevulun stood on Mount Eyval, in whose direction the curses were pronounced in order to complete the number of six tribes required to stand there. The reason the tribe of Shimon was also associated with the tribes in whose direction the blessings were pronounced was that the Torah lists here eleven different curses and the Torah wanted to avoid pronouncing a curse in his direction. Moses decreed that all the tribes receive a blessing, seeing, however, that the tribe of Shimon was not deserving of a blessing on account of Zimri its leader who had caused so much death amongst his own people, he wanted to at least not make it appear as if he were being cursed, i.e. of associating the word ארור with something pronounced in his direction. Had he allowed this to occur Shimon would have been beyond redemption (Rashi in the name of Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan). Our sages in Sifri Vezot Habrachah item 348, claim that the blessing of the tribe of Yehudah contained within it an allusion to a blessing for the tribe of Shimon, seeing that Shimon’s tribal territory was described as an enclave within that of the tribe of Yehudah. The fact that the tribe of Reuven was placed on the mountain in whose direction the curses were pronounced does not constitute something negative against this tribe. I believe that this was the final part of the apology for the episode described in the Torah involving Reuven and Bilhah. Cursing someone who sleeps with the wife of his father (verse 20) was meant to draw our attention to the fact that actually Reuven had never been guilty of that sin. This is why the sages of the Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni Vayechi 157) claim that Yaakov, his father, had already told him that the stigma which had attached itself to him on account of what is described as יצועי עלה in Genesis 49,4 would not be totally removed from him until the one (leader Moses) of whom the Torah had written עלה, “arise!” would come. As soon as Moses arranged for the tribe of Reuven to take his place among the tribes facing the pronouncement of the curses, Reuven’s stigma had been completely wiped out. What occurred at Mount Eival enabled our sages to say (Shabbat 58) that anyone accusing Reuven of having committed the sin of sleeping with his father’s wife is in error. What precisely was the arraignment of the respective tribes like on these two mountains? Our sages in Sotah 32 have described it in these words: “6 tribes ascended the top of Mount Gerizim whereas 6 other tribes ascended the top of Mount Eyval. The priests and Levites took up their position in the valley separating these two mountains. The priests would surround the Holy Ark. The Levites would surround the priests. The Israelites would be on either side of them (on the mountain). This is the meaning of ‘and all of Israel its elders and law-enforcers and judges would stand on either side of the Holy Ark facing the Priests who carried the Ark of the Covenant’ (Joshua 8,33). The Priests and Levites turned their faces in the direction of Mount Gerizim, beginning to recite the blessing, commencing with the words: ‘blessed be the man who has not constructed a hewn image, etc.’ The tribes standing on both mountains would respond by chanting “Amen.” The blessings were followed by the curses, a similar procedure being followed.” After completion of this ceremony they brought the stones and built an altar of them, covering the altar with plaster and inscribing on it the entire Torah in seventy languages. This is proven by verse 8, i.e. באר היטב. After this they took the stones with them returning to their assigned place for the night (Gilgal). Thus far the wording of the Mishnah. [The difficulty in all this is the distance from Gilgal to Mount Eival and the impossibility to accomplish all this within a day without miracle. (Compare the various commentators of the Mishnah), Ed.]

בראשית ברא אלוקים, let the “intellectuals” realize that all the words of our sages and their interpretations are true and accurate. This is what the Talmud (Shabbat 63) had in mind when it quoted Rav Kahane saying that he had studied the Talmud until the age of 18 and had not yet appreciated that although the laws of the Torah are derived from the text, none of the interpretations are such that they can uproot the plain meaning of the text. They are based on anomalies in the text, not on the text itself wherever the law derived from the Torah appears to conflict with the plain meaning of the text. One example is Genesis 2,4 where the word בהבראם, a most unusual construction, used by the sages to declare that the world was created “for the sake of, or with the help of אברהם,” (Bereshit Rabbah 12,9) seeing that the letters in that word are the same as the ones in the name אברהם, [though in a different sequence. Ed.] I shall list the explanations of earlier commentators of old, in order to demonstrate why I did not follow in their footsteps. Some scholars understand the first verse to mean that “at the beginning G’d created heaven and earth.” This is an erroneous explanation, seeing that water preceded the creation of heaven and earth as we know from verse 2 where “the spirit of G’d” is described as already “hovering over the surface of the water.” Moreover, the Torah did not write בראשונה, which would have been appropriate if it had wanted to tell us that heaven and earth preceded all other phenomena in the universe. The word בראשית is in a construct mode, as in Genesis 10,10 ותהי ראשית ממלכתו בבל “the mainstay of his kingdom was Babylon.” A construct mode like this cannot describe the commencement of something but refers to something already in existence. As to the scholars who understand the word as equivalent to the word תחלה in Hoseah 1,2 i.e. so that it would mean “at the beginning G’d created the heaven,” i.e. before He created heaven and earth there was chaos, darkness on the face of the water, etc., so that it emerges that water had been created first, this too is nonsense. How could the Torah refer to a state of the earth prior to creation of the heaven? The plain meaning of the text is, as occurs many times, that something may be mentioned first in one instance although elsewhere this same phenomenon is mentioned as having occurred at a later stage. In Genesis 9,18 we are told about the three sons of Noach who left the ark after the deluge being Shem, Cham and Yephet, and the Torah adds that Cham was the father of Canaan. Although the information about Canaan is quite out of place at this juncture, the fact that later on the Torah tells us that Noach cursed Canaan, makes it necessary to mention him here, as otherwise we would not have known who this Canaan was whom Noachh cursed in verse 25 of the same chapter. We have a similar situation in Genesis 35,22 where, although Reuven’s conduct with Yaakov’s concubine Bilhah is mentioned, Yaakov’s reaction is not mentioned until shortly before his death when he explains why Reuven had not been viewed by him as suitable to occupy the position normally accorded to a firstborn (Genesis 49,3-4). In 35,22 the Torah already tells us that Yaakov had heard about what Reuven had done. Had the Torah not done so, the reader would have been taken aback at Yaakov’s remonstrating with Reuven at this late stage. There are many such examples. Our entire paragraph here was written by Moses in order for us to understand what is written in the Ten Commandments concerning the reason why the Sabbath is holy, i.e. that it is a symbol reminding us of the fact that G’d created the universe in 6 days and rested on the seventh day. (Exodus 20,10) If anyone were to think that the universe as such had already existed then in the format that we see it now, the Torah corrects such thinking by continuing with

and do not [rest] תּוֹסַף is derived from יסף, like (Gen.38:26), “and he did not cease (יָסַף) being intimate with her” (regrettera in French), will regret. [In the expression] אַל-תּוֹסַף, the “sammech” is vowelized with a “pattah” because of the pause accent, as in (Gen. 49:4), “You shall not gain superiority (תּוֹתַר) “; (Ruth 2:14), “and she left over (וַתּתַר),” and many like it.

As we discussed earlier, the Torah hints to the inferiority of the tribe of Reuven by placing his formation behind that of Yehudah, as well as by positioning him strategically in the various tribal listings such that even though he is the firstborn he is often not at the top of the list. We also pointed out that the decline of the tribe of Reuven parallels their progenitor’s earlier fall from leadership. In the book of Bereshit, Reuven seems to be tortured by the prospect of leadership. Understanding the responsibility that traditionally accompanies the firstborn but not having the requisite character, Reuven often responds to crises in a rash and emotional fashion. We see this when he tears his clothes and bemoans his own fate after returning to the pit to find Yosef missing. We also see it when, while trying to convince Ya’akov to let the brothers go back to Egypt, he offers his father the right to kill his own children if he comes back without Binyamin. And finally we see it in Reuven’s disgrace of Bilhah, Rachel’s maidservant and one of Ya’akov’s wives. As a result, his father proclaims him to be as “instable as water.” (Bereshit 49:4.) Thus it follows that Ya’akov designates Yehudah, and to a lesser extent Yosef, to take Reuven’s natural position of leadership. (This is discussed in detail in Redeeming Relevance in Genesis, 101–110.) Turning our attention to his descendants in the book of Bemidbar, we will not surprisingly note a similar ambivalence regarding leadership which ultimately leads to the tribe’s complete withdrawal from such a role. We will now see how this plays itself out.

Depart. Thus העלו ("ascend") is the same meaning as in “יצועי עלה" ("ascended my couch") (Bereishis 49:4). The lamed of למשכן (lit. to the dwelling) is superfluous. Consequently, Rashi writes סביבות ("the vicinity") instead of סביב ("around") to enable it to refer it to the word “dwelling,” given that the word סביב cannot be connected with what follows.

Ovadia Sforno suggests that the Deuteronomy prohibition applies only when the transfer of the firstborn’s rights happens because the father favours one wife over another. It does not apply when the firstborn has been guilty of a sin that would warrant forfeiting his legal privilege. That is what Jacob meant when, on his deathbed, he said to Reuben: “Unstable as water, you will no longer be first, for you went up onto your father’s bed, onto my couch and defiled it” (Gen. 49:4). This is stated explicitly in the book of Chronicles which says that “Reuben…was the firstborn, but when he defiled his father’s marriage bed, his rights as firstborn were given to the sons of Joseph son of Israel” (I Chr. 5:1).

This follows the pattern of their blessings. In both Jacob and Moses’s final words, the younger brother was praised while the eldest was scorned. Reuben was scourged by Jacob: “Unstable as water, you shall excel no longer” (Genesis 49:4). Moses mitigated this with a promise of life, but the curse remains standing: “Reuben shall live and not die, though he be few in number” (Deuteronomy 33:6).

Reuben, you are my firstborn! My might and first fruit of my vigor. Exceeding in rank and exceeding in honor… Unstable as water [paĥaz ka-mayim], you shall excel no longer; For when you mounted your father’s bed, you brought disgrace. My couch he mounted! Genesis 49:3–4

וישמע ישראל, “Israel heard about this.” According to Nachmanides, the phrasing of Yaakov’s reaction to the manner in which he reacted to his first born son’s defiling his bedroom is an example of Yaakov’s extreme humility. He could easily have banned Reuven from his house for having been guilty of such a misdemeanour, as well as having disinherited him. Instead, the Torah reports that Reuven continued to be a full member of the 12 sons, as we have been told in verse 23. In fact, the Torah goes further by writing immediately that Reuven ranked first among all his sons. (verse 24) The Torah draws our attention to this by making a single paragraph out of what normally should have been two separate paragraphs. Looking at the plain meaning of the text, it is possible that Reuven’s intention in invading his father’s private bedroom which he shared with Bilhah, was to prevent Yaakov siring more children with Bilhah, seeing that as the firstborn, he would receive 2 shares of the eventual inheritance, any additional children Yaakov would sire would result in his share of the inheritance becoming diminished. At the same time, he did not have similar worries about his own mother giving birth to more children, as she was beyond child-bearing age, and Zilpah might have died already. It is also possible that he was simply concerned about the insult endured by his mother who had to now take a back seat not only to her deceased sister Rachel, but even to her maidservant, when he observed that his father made Bilhah’s tent his principal bedroom. It is possible that the verse “Yaakov’s sons were 12,” was meant to alert us to the fact that he sired no more children after this episode. Some commentators interpret the line “Reuven went and slept with Bilhah,” to mean that now that Yaakov had lost both Rachel and Bilhah, there was no cause to worry since the twelve sons who were to make up the Jewish people had been born already. Yet another explanation is that the line “Yaakov’s sons numbered 12, etc.,” means that originally there had been 13, seeing that Reuven being the firstborn had been considered equivalent to two sons. Now, in view of his indiscretion, he had lost his superiority vis-à-vis the other brothers. Rabbi Yehudah the pious, explains the episode as follows: at the time when Yaakov had settled in that region, Reuven left that region and set up house by himself, the reason being that he had been guilty of the above-mentioned indiscretion in Bilhah’s tent, where he had been presumed to have had relations with Yaakov’s concubine. He had done so, in order to forestall his father from doing so, now that Rachel had died. When Yaakov heard about the reason why Reuven had fled the scene, he moved his tent to Leah. As soon as Reuven heard this, he returned to the fold, i.e. “the sons of Yaakov were12.” Some commentators point to the wording of וישכב את בלהה instead of וישכב עם בלהה, as meaning that all Reuven had done was to put his bed next to that of Bilhah. [the expression את always denotes a lesser degree of intimacy than the expression עם. (compare Genesis 30,16,Samuel II 11,4; ) Ed.] Further proof that Reuven did not actually sleep with Bilhah, is provided by Yaakov himself in Genesis 49,4 when he describes Reuven’s indiscretion with the words: כי עלית משכבי אביך, אז חללת יצועי עלה, “for when you entered your father’s bedroom you desecrated him who ascended the bed that had been made for me.” All Reuven had been guilty of was to disarray the bedclothes, not to lie in them. He spoke about the person lying in the bed in the third person, instead of saying: “you lay in my bed.”

Aḥerim say: He rearranged two beds, one of the Divine Presence and one of his father. And that is the meaning of that which is written: “Unstable as water, you shall not excel; because you went up to your father’s bed; then you did defile it; he went up to my bed [yetzu’i]” (Genesis 49:4). Do not read it as yetzu’i, in the singular; rather, read it as yetzu’ai, my beds, in the plural, referring to both the bed of his father and to the bed of the Divine Presence, which rests in the tents of the righteous.

The Gemara notes that the matter of Reuben’s innocence is parallel to a dispute between tanna’im. As it was taught in a baraita: The verse states: “Unstable [paḥaz] as water, you shall not excel.” The Sages understood paḥaz as an acronym. Rabbi Eliezer says that it means: You were impulsive [pazta], you were liable [ḥavta], and you acted contemptuously [zalta]. Rabbi Yehoshua says that it means: You trampled the law [pasata al dat], you sinned [ḥatata], and you were promiscuous [zanita]. Rabban Gamliel says: The acronym does not refer to Reuben’s sin. It refers to his repentance: You prayed [pilalta], you trembled in fear [ḥalta], and your prayer shone forth [zarḥa].

The Torah is not telling us that Yaakov did wrong. There are all sorts of explanations that reconcile his behaviour with later law. The Torah had not yet been given to the Jewish people (although Ramban notes that Yaakov did keep the Torah laws when he was in the land of Israel, but his gift of a double portion to Yosef happened in Egypt). Another explanation offered is that we are forbidden to transfer the birthright on grounds of love alone, but we may do so if we believe that the firstborn has significant character deficiencies, which Yaakov believed to be true of Reuven (Bereshit 49:3–4; Abarbanel).

The sons of Reuben the first-born of Israel. (He was the first-born; but when he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph son of Israel, so he is not reckoned as first-born in the genealogy;

(Cf. 1 Kings 7.51–8.11.) When all the work that King Solomon undertook for the House of the LORD was completed, Solomon brought the things that his father David had consecrated—the silver, the gold, and the utensils—and deposited them in the treasury of the House of God.

Unstable as water, you shall no longer be superior, [However, because you went towards your anger like flowing water, you will not benefit, you will not receive an additional portion,] for you have gone up [to the place of] your father’s bed. You profaned He Who went up on my couch[, my son, you went up].

I will liken thee, my son Reuben, to a little garden into the midst of which there enter rapid torrents, which it cannot bear, but is carried away before them. Be repentant then, my son Reuben, with good works, for thou hast sinned; and sin no more, that that which thou hast sinned may be forgiven thee.

I will liken thee to a little garden in the midst of which there enter torrents swift and strong, which it cannot bear, but is overwhelmed. Be repentant then, Reuben my son, for thou hast sinned, and add not; that wherein thou hast sinned it may be forgiven thee; for it is reckoned to thee as if thou wentest in to have to do with the wife of thy father at the time that thou didst confound my bed upon which thou wentest up.

A segulah for a person moving to a new house is to bring into it a sword, or a knife, or some other type of weapon. A hint to this is found in the verse, “A house is built with ChoKhMah (wisdom)” (Proverbs 24:3); the letters being an acronym for “Klei Chamas Me’cheiroteihem (weapons are their wares)” (Genesis 49:5). [The explanation of me’cheiroteihem is alternatively] “their swords” or “their places of dwelling.”

A segulah for a person moving into a new house is to bring into it a sword, a knife, or some other type of weapon. A hint to this is found in the verse, “A house is built with ChoKhMah (wisdom)” (Proverbs 24:3); the letters standing for “Klei Chamas Me’cheiroteihem (weapons are their wares)” (Genesis 49:5) —[me’cheiroteihem referring alternatively to] “their swords” or “their dwelling places.”

1. Simeon and Levi are a pair; etc., for in their anger they slew a man, and in their self-will, they lamed an ox. Ramban explained, they slew a man, is all the men of Shekhem; an ox, is the dynasty of Shekhem and Chamor. And behold all of the brothers answered with deception in front of Jacob, that [the people of Shekhem] should circumcise themselves. However, Ramban wrote that their intention was [only] to kill Shekhem and Chamor, who sinned, and to release Dinah from the house of Shekhem and [then] to go on their way. However, Simeon and Levi alone took counsel to kill the whole city, which had not sinned. But behold Jacob testified about Simeon and Levi, that, God forbid, that they went for three days with [this] evil counsel. Rather, their opinion was like all of the [other] brothers. However, at the last minute, when they approached to release Dinah and to kill Shekhem, their rage flared and they killed all the people of the city like a single man. So in their self-will – when they were not in their anger but rather with their own will, all of the three days – they only slew an ox, meaning Shekhem and Chamor. Hence their sin was not so great. Therefore, their blessing is To their council, may my soul never come. Its explanation is that since it is from this sin that the sin of Korah’s company gets its spark, from Levi; and Zimri, the son of Salu from Simeon, Jacob prayed about them, that their punishment should nevertheless not reach so far that it would reach Jacob’s sould, God forbid. And it is like my teacher, the Haflaah wrote, And Korah took (Numbers 16:1) the holy flow from Yitzhar and Kehat and Levi [all of whom are mentioned in the verse as his ancestors], but it did not reach Jacob [who is not mentioned]. And likewise, Zimri the son of Salu, the chieftain of a paternal house of the Simeonites (Numbers 25:14), but it did not reach Jacob. For then, God forbid, there would be no rectification for them. It then comes out that this was a blessing for them.

שמעון ולוי אחים, “Shimon and Levi are full brothers.” This point is recorded by Yaakov to inform us that these two were always of the same mind, as opposed to the other brothers. However, while generally speaking, this is laudable, it could become dangerous when their wrath is aroused.

כלי חמס מכרותיהם, “their weapons are lawlessness.” (JPS) Their very close relationship is a dangerous weapon.

The word מכרה is familiar to us from Kings II 12,6, where the expression: איש מאת מכרו, means: “each from his buddy.”

שמעון ולוי אחים, כלי חמס מכרותיהם, “Shimon and Levi are brothers, their kinship is the use they make of weapons.” Yaakov implied that whereas they had displayed their being brothers when avenging the rape of innocent Dinah, their sister, they had failed to do so in their treatment of Joseph, their brother. (B’reshit Rabbah,98,5 and 99,7)

SIMEON AND LEVI ARE BRETHREN. He referred to them as brethren because of what they did to the city of Shechem. (The point is all twelve sons were brethren, Why, then, does Jacob single out Simeon and Levi as brethren? Scripture tells us that at Shechem two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi…took each man his sword, and came upon the city unawares, and slew all the males (Gen. 34:25). Simeon and Levi were thus brothers in council with regard to the destruction of Shechem (Weiser).)

THEIR KINSHIP. Some say that the word mekherotehem (their kinship) is similar in meaning to ha-karat (the show of) in The show of (ha-karat) their countenance doth witness against them (Is. 3:9). (That is, one can tell by looking at them that they employ weapons of violence (Weiser).) However, this interpretation is grammatically impossible. (Mekherotehem and ha-karat come from different roots (Weiser).) Others say that mekherotehem is to be rendered their possessions (Our text is thus to be rendered: weapons of violence are their possessions.) and is to be compared to the word tikhru (ye shall buy) in and ye shall also buy (tikhru) water of them for money (Deut. 2:6). However, this, too, is incorrect for the word tikhru means to dig. (Deut. 2:6 is thus to be rendered: ye shall dig water of them for money; that is, pay them so that they will give you permission to dig for water (Cherez).) Others say that mekherotehem is related to the word mekhirah (sale) and the meaning of mekherotehem is they sold themselves, (That is, they sold themselves to weapons of destruction.) as in a people that jeoparded (cheref) their lives unto the death (Jud. 5:18). (Cf. Kimchi in Jud. 5:18. Although different verbs are employed in our verse and in Jud. 5:18, the idea is the same. For an alternate interpretation see Krinsky.) I believe that mekherotehem comes from the same root as mekhorotayich (thine origin) (Ezek. 16:3). (It means in the land of their origin.) While the prepositional bet is missing from mekherotehem, (If mekherotehem means in their land wherein they dwelt, Scripture should have read bi-mekherotehem.) we find the same with the word bet (house) in that was found in the house of (bet) (Scripture should have read be-vet rather than bet. We thus see that Scripture occasionally omits the prepositional bet.) the Lord (II Kings 16:8) and with the word ma’on (habitation) in which I have commanded in My habitation (ma’on) (I Sam. 2:29). (Scripture should have read be-ma’on rather than ma’on. See above note.) Our text refers to the violence which Simeon and Levi committed in the land of their origin by deceitfully slaying the entire city of Shechem after making a covenant with them. (Cf. Gen. 34. Weapons of violence their kinship should thus be rendered: they employed weapons of violence in the land of their origin.)

שמעון ולוי אחים, Shimon and Levi are brothers, etc. Jacob stressed the fact that Shimon and Levi were brothers as their similarity was natural, they shared many attitudes, something that is not always the case between brothers. It is also possible that Jacob referred to their joint action in Shechem as well as their plan to dispose of Joseph at the time, when he described their brotherliness. Jacob may have meant that these two between them shared the element of fire in an exaggerated manner. Our sages in Yuma 22 describe that Saul committed one sin which cost him the kingdom whereas David committed two serious sins without forfeiting his kingdom. The reason for this was that Saul was even-tempered by nature whereas David was impetuous by nature as we know from Samuel I 16,12 where the prophet describes David as אדמוני, red cheeked, i.e. hot-blooded. When G'd judges people He makes allowances for their natural tendencies, their genetic mix. Although someone who contains a greater than average share of the element of fire will be most enthusiastic in his service of G'd as a result (as we know from the tribe of Levi), this enthusiasm does not act as a barrier against his committing errors on occasion. Such errors also reflect his genetic composition. The fact that a person such as Saul was of an even temperament usually acted as a barrier against his falling victim to the lures of the evil urge. When Jacob described Shimon and Levi as אחים the word is derived from חם, heat. Jacob cursed their anger because when it erupted it was apt to prove unusually destructive. Anger is rooted in the element fire.

Once such anger is kindled it results in excess heat and that is why Jacob compared their anger to כלי חמס מכרותיהם, the use of weapons to commit violence. By stressing the word מכרותיהם, (from the root הכר, something one is conscious of), Jacob indicated that Shimon and Levi's tendencies to commit acts of violence were not something they had inherited from their father, something deeply rooted in their subconscious, but when such sentiments surfaced they became very conscious of them as such. The cause of their excesses was the extra amount of fire in the basic composition of their respective bodies.This genetic imbalance was responsible for such deeds as their act of violence against Joseph.

The word מכרותיהם also contains the root מכר, sale. Jacob referred to the sale of Joseph as an act of violence perpetrated by these two brothers, seeing that Joseph had not been guilty. Although all the brothers had participated in that sale, closer examination of what happened will show you that these two brothers were the instigators of all that violence. They were the ones who said to each other in 37,19: "let us see what will become of his dreams when we will set out to kill him, etc." (compare Bereshit Rabbah 99,6).

שמעון ולוי אחים, “Shimon and Levi are brothers, etc.” Who did not know that these two were brothers? According to the plain meaning of the verse Yaakov wanted to state that when these two brothers attacked the people of Shechem they were both of one mind that only violence was the solution to the problem of releasing Dinah which confronted them. When Yaakov uses the termמכרותיהם , the meaning is similar to סעודותיהם, that which is “their meal,” i.e. what provides them with סעד, support, sustenance. The word מכרה is related to כרה, i.e. a meal (compare Kings II 6,23). What Yaakov meant was that these brothers use the tools of violence to live and sustain themselves. Yaakov implied that when the brothers Shimon and Levi killed the male inhabitants of Shechem they killed people who personally had not done any harm to them, but on the contrary, had made a covenant with them. Yaakov therefore felt the need to apologise and to make clear that he had not been a party to their scheme. This is why he stressed בסודם אל תבא נפשי, ”may my soul not enter their conspiracy.” A Midrashic approach to this verse (Bereshit Rabbah 99,7) “Shimon and Levi are brothers when it comes to taking revenge for the rape of Dinah, but when it came to their behaviour vis-a-vis Joseph they certainly did not act as brothers.” By using the word מכרותיהם, Yaakov alluded to the sale of Joseph i.e. מכירה. We should remember that the four brothers Reuven, Shimon, Levi, and Yehudah were the senior brothers. Seeing that the Torah reported that both Reuven and Yehudah considered the sale of Joseph as inappropriate (compare 37,22 and 37,26), this leaves Shimon and Levi as the ones who must have suggested that Joseph be sold. This explains why when the brothers went to Egypt, Joseph detained only Shimon.

כלי חמס מכרותיהם, “instruments of violence are their stock-in-trade.” According to Bereshit Rabbah 99,7 the arms in their hands are used to perpetrate acts of violence and have been stolen from Esau. The Midrash bases himself on Ovadiah 10, “for the outrage to your brother Jacob, disgrace shall engulf you.” [— The abuse of Yitzchak’s blessing to Esau “you will survive by your sword.” Yaakov had not attacked Esau. Ed.] A kabbalistic approach: please refer to 29,32 where I have explained the mystical dimension of these words.

שמעון ולוי אחים, they had acted like brothers in their concern for their sister Dinah, as the Torah credits them in Genesis 34,25.

כלי חמס, their swords, (weapons) have become instruments of violence. [used aggressively instead of defensively. Ed.] Yaakov considered the slaying of the male population of Shechem as having been illegal. He did not consider the men of the city responsible for the sin of rape committed by their crown prince Shechem. Seeing that their act was illegal they endangered their whole family, including their father, as they could not count on G’d’s protection against the avengers of Shechem when the wrong they had committed themselves had brought that attack upon them. The fact that in the event, G’d did protect them, was not thanks to these two brothers.

מכרותיהם, as if the Torah had written במכרותיהם. The construction is parallel to ארץ מגוריהם, the land of their sojourn, i.e. the land in which they sojourned. The people of Shechem had lived peaceably side by side with the family of Yaakov, there being no war-like actions between them. [The author apparently sees in the word מכרותיהם the root הכר, “to recognise someone, i.e. to know him well.” Yaakov describes the deed of Shimon and Levi against the people of Shechem as having been perpetrated on friendly unsuspecting neighbours. Ed.] Ezekiel 21,35 as well as 29,14 also speaks of מכורותיך meaning מגורים the place where one resides. Onkelos also translates it in this sense. Midrash Tanchuma Vayechi 9 understands the word as applying to their swords. In Greek a sword is known as makirin.

SIMEON AND LEVI ARE BRETHREN. Jacob is saying that they possess the attribute of kinship for their hearts were inflamed concerning their sister. (Ibid., 34:25-26.) He is thus stating in their defense that they acted as they did out of their brotherly zeal, thus suggesting [that were it not for this extenuating circumstance], they would have been deserving of great punishment and their sin would have been unforgivable since what they did to the people of Shechem was an act of violence. The correct interpretation appears to me to be that he is saying that Simeon and Levi are real brothers, uniting in fraternity and brotherhood in counsel and deed. Now I have already explained (Ibid., 34:13.) that Jacob was angry with Simeon and Levi for having committed violence when they killed the people of the city of Shechem, for they (The people of the city committed no wrong. It was Shechem who violated Dinah, and the people were not in a position to protest his action.) had not sinned against them at all. They even made a covenant with them and they were circumcised, thus being enabled to return to G-d and become included within the people of the household of Abraham, part of the souls that they had gotten in Haran. (Above, 12:5. A reference to the proselytes whom Abraham and Sarah had brought “beneath the sheltering wings of the Shechina” (Rashi, ibid.)) Jacob was additionally angry with them lest people say that the matter was done at his suggestion, thus creating a profaning of G-d’s Name, as people will say that the prophet has committed violence and plunder. This is the intent of the verse, Let my soul not come into their council— (Verse 6 here.) this is an excuse for he was not in their council when they answered the people of Shechem with subtlety, (Above, 34:13.) and he was not united in their assembly when they came upon the people of the city and killed them. It was for this reason that he cursed their anger and wrath. (Verse 7 here.) And so did Onkelos translate: “My soul was not in their council when they assembled to strike, etc.”

INSTRUMENTS OF VIOLENCE ‘M’CHEIROTHEIHEM.’ According to Onkelos and all commentators, (Rashi and R’dak.) the meaning of the verse is as if it were written: instruments of violence ‘m’garotheihem’ (in their sojournings). This is similar to the verses: Thy sojourning (‘m’chorothayich’) and thy nativity, (Ezekiel 16:3. There too m’chorothayich is as if it were written m’gorothayich.) into the land of their sojourn (‘m’churatham’). (Ibid., 29:14.) Thus the commentators said that the meaning of the verse is that they did violence in the land of their sojourn. (That is, the people lived with them in peace, and they did not act accordingly.) Now if so, the approximate sense of the verse is as follows: “They had instruments of violence in the land of their sojournings,” it being referred to as “the land of their sojournings” since they lived there afterwards. (At the time when Simeon and Levi wrought punishment upon the city of Shechem, they had just entered the land. How then could Jacob refer to the event as having taken place in the land of their sojourning? Ramban answers that this is a reference to the future.) But in my opinion Jacob is saying that “the instruments of violence are their dwelling places,” i.e., the essence of their lives, even as the expression, the days of my pilgrimage (‘m’gurai’). (See above, 47:9.) He is thus saying that the very instruments of violence are their dwelling places for they live and sustain themselves by them. A similar expression is found in the verse: The desert yieldeth them bread for their children. (Job 24:5. The word “yieldeth” is not in the Hebrew text. Ramban interprets the meaning of the verse as follows: “The desert is to him bread for his children,” for there he has the opportunity to rob and plunder. Similarly, the verse here says that the sword is their livelihood. Ramban’s interpretation of the above verse in the book of Job is also found in his commentary to that book. See Kitvei Haramban, I, p. 80.) And it is on account of this that their father divided them in Jacob (Verse 7 here.) so that they should not unite and scattered them in Israel so that they should not assemble. This was indeed so, for Simeon’s inheritance in the Land was contained in the inheritance of the children of Judah, as it is written, And their inheritance was in the midst of the inheritance of the children of Judah, (Joshua 19:1.) with the cities of Simeon set apart from one another throughout the entire tribe of Judah. And Levi’s inheritance consisted of the Cities of Refuge, (See Numbers 35:1-8.) which were scattered through all Israel. (See Joshua, Chapter 21.)

מכירותיהם The reason why Yaakov used such a dual, pluralistic, mode of the word was the special relationship which existed between Shimon and Levi, a relationship almost like that of twin brothers, as if the term אחותיהם instead of merely אחים, would describe their mutual brotherliness. However, their special relationship appeared to concentrate on their doing something negative, i.e. they used destructive tools, weapons in the pursuit of their designs.

Whereas the terms מכורותיך and מולדתיך occur in Ezekiel 16,3-4, describing close relatives in one’s birthplace, in our verse, the vowel tzeyreh under the letter כ converts this word into one that could have been written with a dagesh, i.e. from the conjugation piel, the strong, transitive conjugation, suggesting that these emotions were evident only when the two brothers engaged in a scheme of doubtful ethical merit. The construction of the word is parallel to Job 37,12 where the word מסבות, describes clouds in constant motion foreboding turmoil, nature at its most destructive. Examples of the expected vowel chirik becoming a tzeyreh instead, are found in Lamentations 2,9, as well as in Numbers 8,26, and in Psalms 74,18. In all those examples the addition of the extra “dot” next to the chirik converts the meaning into something stronger, more aggressive, more intense.

שמעון ולוי אחים SIMEON AND LEVI WERE BRETHREN in the plot against Shechem and against Joseph. Scripture states, (Genesis 37:19—20) “And they said one to another… (literally, one to his brother) come now therefore and let us slay him” (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 9). Now, who were these? Should you say Reuben or Judah was one of them — but they were not consenting parties to slaying him (cf. Genesis 37:21, Genesis 37:22 and Genesis 37:26). Should you say they were the sons of the handmaids (Dan, Naphtali, Gad or Asher) — their hatred of Joseph was not so perfect a hatred that they would wish to kill him for it is said, (Genesis 37:2) “whilst a lad he used to be with the sons of Bilhah and with the sons of Zilpah etc.” Issachar and Zebulun would certainly not have spoken thus in the presence of their elder brothers. Consequently one must needs say that they were Simeon and Levi whom their father called “brethren” (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 9).

כלי חמס INSTRUMENTS OF VIOLENCE (חמס may mean something that has been usurped from another) — This business of murdering is חמס, not rightly theirs; it is part of the blessing conferred upon Esau; it is his business and you have usurped (חמסתם) it from him (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 9).

מכרתיהם denotes weapons. In the Greek language the word for a sword is fiaxmoa (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 9). Another interpretation of מכרתיהם is: (taking מכרתיהם as מגרתיהם their sojournings with an interchange of כ and ג) in the land of their sojournings they got into the habit of using weapons of violence, מכרתיהם being of the same root as (Ezekiel 16:3) “Thine habitation (מכרתיך) and thy nativity [is in the land of the Canaanite].” This is how Onkelos renders it.

In Schimeons und Lewis Charakter tritt ein Zug hervor, der sie, um an die Spitze der künftigen Leitung gestellt zu werden, eigentlich ganz besonders befähigt hätte. Sie sind אחים, haben das brüderliche Gesamtgefühl (von אחה durch einen alle durchschlingenden Faden an einander gereiht) in hohem Grade bewährt, das ohne allen Egoismus sich von dem dem Geringsten des Familienkreises zugefügten Unrecht ebenso getroffen fühlt, als wäre es ihm selbst geworden. Allein: .כלי חמס מכרתיהם מכרתיהם: entweder von כור, wovon כור, der Tiegel, in welchem etwas bereitet wird, und dann מכֵרה allgemein: Mittel; wahrscheinlicher aber von כרה .כרה: graben; im Vergleich mit חפר ergibt sich, daß חפר bis auf den Grund graben, Wasser aus der Tiefe holen heißt, daher überhaupt: Verborgenes ans Licht bringen, wovon: erspähen, und auch jenes Erschrecken und Erbleichen, das eintritt, wenn eines Menschen bisher verborgen gewesene Vergangenheit ans Licht gezogen wird, während בוש vielmehr die Scham über getäuschte Erwartung von der Zukunft ausdrückt. Dem zur Seite heißt כרה: das erste Abstechen einer Grube, die erste Anlage, dann überhaupt: Zurichtung, z. B. eines Mahles, endlich auch: die Erwerbung, Aneignung eines Gutes oder einer Person: אשר כריתי לי (Bamidbar 50, 5), ואכרה לי (Hosea 3, 2), so daß die Wurzel in ihrer ursprünglichen Bedeutung mit קרה ,קרא: etwas zu sich rufen, verwandt, und somit: etwas zu sich bringen, etwas zu erlangen suchen, zu bedeuten scheint. So: וגם selbst Wasser habt ihr nur auf ganz (Bamidbar 2, 6) מים תכרו מאתם בכסף ושתיתם friedlichem Wege von ihnen für Geld zu erlangen suchen müssen für euren Durst. Im Hinblick auf die zitierte Stelle Hosea 3, 2 dürfte dann מְכֵרָה ganz eigentlich die Bewerbungen um eine Person bedeuten. Schimeon und Lewi haben ihre ganz friedlich und freundlich aussehenden Bewerbungsmittel, Bedingungen, die sie unter dem Scheine als מהר ומתן dem Schechem auferlegten, zu Werkzeugen der schreiendsten Gewalttat gebraucht.

Brothers. Because of your brotherhood you should have received the kingship after Reuvein lost it, but a king, who is charged with establishing justice, cannot be a violent person.

כלי חמס מכרותיהם, people who make use of weaponry in their day to day activities are not suitable material for wielding political and military power. Hence neither one of them will be accorded the status taken away from Reuven. (compare Proverbs 29,4 where Solomon describes a king’s primary characteristic as being במשפט יעמד ארץ, “seeing to it that the rule of law and justice prevails on earth.”) Shimon and Levi had disqualified themselves from claiming such a distinction.

Their hatred was not so complete... Rashi did not give the reason of “They would not have spoken before their older brothers” because Yoseif had told Yaakov that [the older brothers] were calling the handmaids’ sons “slaves.” Thus Yoseif slandered the handmaids’ sons, and they would have had a justification [to speak before their older brothers,] since Yoseif called them “slaves.” Thus Rashi gives a stronger reason, [that their hatred was not so complete]. (Maharshal)

Yissachar and Zevulun would not have spoken before their older brothers... You might ask: How did Shimon and Leivi speak before Reuvein? Maharshal answers: Reuvein was not there at the time, as he had gone to attend to his father [see Rashi, 37:29].

Another explanation of מכרותיהם: in the land of their sojournings (מגורתם)... [Rashi knows this] because the כ of מכרותיהם is interchangeable with a ג, since they are among the group of letters of ג–י–כ–ק [that are interchangeable].

Simeon and Levi are brothers. These two brothers were apparently very close. They acted together, and Jacob likewise addresses them together. Weapons of villainy are their heritage. 15 They grew up using weapons from a young age.

כלי חמס מכרותיהם, “their occupation with weaponry is stolen.” Onkelos understands the word מכרותיהם as similar to מגורותיהם, “places where they sojourned,” meaning that both Shimon and Levi had (stolen?) weapons from their uncle Esau and they used them to perpetrate acts of violence in the land they sojourned in. Other commentators feel that the expression כלי חמס defines their lifestyle, i.e. wherever they sojourned they used strong-arm methods to get their way and to secure their livelihood. Still other commentators understand the word מכרותיהם as derived from מכירה, “sale,” Yaakov saying that these two brothers had figuratively speaking “sold themselves” to the use of violence, similar to Judges 5,18 עם חרף נפשם למות, “a people that mocked death.”

“Simeon and Levi are a pair” [49:5]. Jacob called Simeon and Levi and said to them. You are brothers in agreement about Shechem and about Joseph, that you destroyed the city of Shechem. You should not have done that, since the whole city of Shechem had circumcised themselves. Perhaps, they would have become proper Jews after that. (Ramban, Genesis, 49:5.) Bahya writes. “When you mounted your father’s bed” [49:4], means, you have desecrated two beds. One is the bed of the Shekhinah that used to be on the bed and the other is my bed. Therefore, it is written, “my beds.” This means two beds, since the Shekhinah was always with Jacob. Even in bed, Jacob’s thought was on the Shekhinah. The Midrash says that Jacob said to Reuben. You will not be healed from the disgrace until Moses Our Teacher will ascend mount Ebal and will count Reuben first for the curses. That is, they will curse whoever will transgress the Torah. Moses Our Teacher will say to the tribe of Reuben that they should ascend mount Ebal and should curse. “Cursed be he who sleeps with his father’s wife” [Deut. 27:20]. This means, cursed be he who sleeps with his father’s wife. As soon as all of Israel knew that Reuben was innocent, then he was forgiven for the transgression. (Bahya, Genesis, 49:4.)

“Their weapons are tools of lawlessness” [49:5]. Jacob said to Simeon and Levi. You have stolen and robbed the sword from Esau. That is to say, your thing is not to go about with swords, as Esau, who goes about with the sword. It is his blessing, that he should commit murder. (Rashi, Genesis, 49:5.)

Only this, that she gives birth to three children destined for greatness: Miriam, the prophetess, Aaron, Israel’s first high priest, and Moses, its greatest leader. She endows her children, genetically or by example, with the gift of leadership. We can infer something more. She and her husband are both from the tribe of Levi. A few chapters earlier, the Torah has told us in connection with Levi, Jacob’s third-born child, that his father did not see him destined for great things. Together with Simeon, he had rescued their sister Dina at the cost of what Jacob thought was excessive violence. On his deathbed he delivers both a prediction and a curse: “Simeon and Levi are brothers; their wares are instruments of violence. Let my soul not enter their council, my heart not join their company, for in their anger they killed men and hamstrung oxen as they pleased. Cursed be their anger for it is fierce, and their fury, for it is cruel” (Gen. 49:5).

The rabbis in the Talmud developed these teachings further, in their unique midrashic-homiletical style, through the “interpretation” of appropriate passages in the Bible. As Jacob was addressing his children before his death, he said of two of them: “Simeon and Levi are brethren; weapons of violence their kinship.” (Genesis 49:5.) This, of course, is plain enough. The old father was referring to his two sons who destroyed the city of Shechem because their sister had been violated there. However, according to the Midrash, what Jacob really said to his children was this: “These weapons (with which you slaughtered the inhabitants of Shechem) are stolen in your hands. Whom do they fit? Your kin Esau, the one who sold the right of the firstborn,” playing on the phonetic similarity of the Hebrew word for “kin” and the word for “to sell.” (Bereishit Rabbah 98:5.) Referring to other biblical verses, the rabbis demonstrate that “the voice” is the tool of Jacob, while the “hand” is that of Esau. (Mekhilta, Beshallaḥ 3.) The “voice” — prayer, ideas, persuasion — is the strength of Jacob, his instrument of defense. This thought is finally formulated in the following categorical manner: “There is no efficacious prayer in which there is not something of the seed of Jacob and there is no victorious war in which there is not something present of the seed of Esau.” (T.B. Gittin 57b.)

Chapter (82) 83: Prophets [1] "I will assemble Jacob, all of you; I will bring together the remnant of Israel;. (Micah 2:12). Like it is said in scriptures: Assemble and listen, and complete [note: last word גומר doesn't exist in verse] (Genesis 49:2). Although the exact time of judgment day is unknown, I say to you that when you gather and assemble, at that moment you will be redeemed, as it is said, "I will surely gather all of you, O Jacob; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold, like a flock in its pasture, a noisy multitude of men" (Micah 2:12). "Reuben, you are my firstborn" (Genesis 49:3), I have not seen a blemish in you since I was born. "My might and the beginning of my strength" (same verse), since the day I was born I have been saying, "Perhaps Reuben will go up to the roof and die, or he will go down and fall." You were the beginning of my strength. "Excelling in dignity and excelling in power" (same verse), and because of the sin you committed, they took three crowns away from you and gave them to your brothers: the firstborn to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingdom to Judah. Otherwise, you would have been the firstborn. "Excelling in dignity," that is the priesthood, as it is said, "And Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things" (Exodus 28:38). "Excelling in power," I was worthy of purifying them, as it is written, "To cleanse and to sprinkle" (Leviticus 14:56). "Unstable as water" (Genesis 49:4), our rabbis have taught that three liquids are forbidden because of exposure: water, wine, and milk. If one finds exposed milk, water, or wine, they should be spilled out, just as you are unstable as water. Alternatively, "unstable" means that you acted recklessly, disgracefully, and insulted others. Just as the vessels in which liquids are poured out or stored become unusable, but the liquids themselves remain, so too you, because of your sin, should not remain. Another thing: is raging like water. Just as water purifies for everyone, so too will you purify your sins when the one who is saved from the water comes to give you blood, and who is this but Moses, as it is written, "She called his name Moses, for I drew him out of the water" (Exodus 2:10). And when does he give you blood? When you spread out your bed (Genesis 49:14), when he comes to ascend Mount Nebo, as it is written, "Let Reuben live and not die" (Deuteronomy 33:6). "Simeon and Levi are brothers" (Genesis 49:5), and not only were they brothers, but they became brothers to do justice, as it is said, "And two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, took each man his sword" (Genesis 34:25). Their weapons are instruments of violence (Genesis 49:5). The Greek language is their swords. Jacob said, "If these two tribes sit together, they will destroy the world. But I will scatter them, divide them among Jacob and disperse them among Israel" (Genesis 49:7). "Judah, your brothers will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies" (Genesis 49:8), referring to his killing of Esau. Similarly, Moses said, "His hands are his to contend with; you helped him against his foes" (Deuteronomy 33:7). "Judah, your lion's cub; from prey, my son, you have gone up" (Genesis 49:9), which is as you were named. So did your mother say, "This time I will thank God" (Genesis 29:35), and she praised God in the story of Tamar, and all the tribes praised her. "The sons of my concubine have risen against me" (Genesis 49:29), Tamar's tragedy, that she and her two sons were already doomed, as it says "they brought her out and burned her" (Genesis 38:24), but she confessed and saved herself and her two sons, just as Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were saved whole when they were thrown into the furnace. "He crouches like a lion, like a lioness--who dares to rouse him?" (Genesis 49:9), referring to David, the anointed one from you, as it says "whose heart is like that of a lion" (2 Samuel 17:10). "Forbidding the vine its fruit [and the donkey's colt to drink] (Genesis 49:11). This refers to the Messiah who will arise from you, as it is written, 'humble and riding on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey' (Zechariah 9:9). And to the flute and the finisher. Where are the Israelites forbidden and their sins atoned for? In the territory of Judah in Jerusalem. 'The scepter shall not depart from Judah' (Genesis 49:10) refers to the kingdom, 'nor a lawgiver' (ibid.) refers to the leader, 'until Shiloh comes' (ibid.) refers to the Messiah, 'and to him shall be the obedience of the people' (ibid.). 'And the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king' (Hosea 3:5), and similarly it says, 'and she ate and was satisfied, and left over' (Ruth 2:14). 'And she ate' refers to the leader, as it is written, 'and from among your brothers you shall appoint a leader' (Deuteronomy 17:15), 'and was satisfied' refers to the kingdom, and 'left over' refers to the leadership. Zebulun shall dwell by the seashore, and he shall be a haven for ships (Genesis 49:13)." "He who makes ships, goes forth and comes back and brings sufficiency to the tribe of Yissachar, who occupy themselves with Torah, as it is said, Yissachar is a strong-boned donkey, crouching among the sheepfolds. And he saw a resting place that was good, and the land that it was pleasant, and he inclined his shoulder to bear, and became a servant to tribute. (Genesis 49:14-15). Those who toil in Torah, as it is said, "And of the children of Yissachar, who had understanding of the times, to know what Yisrael ought to do; the heads of them were two hundred; and all their brothers were at their commandment." (1 Chronicles 12:33). This teaches that two hundred members of the Sanhedrin stood from the tribe of Yissachar, and all of them were with the power of Zebulun, who go out to the sea and bring them [Yissachar] what they need, as it is said, "Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out, and Yissachar, in your tents." (Deuteronomy 33:18)." "Dan will judge his people" (Genesis 49:16). This refers to rest. "Let Dan be a serpent" (ibid. v. 17) refers to Samson, who, just as a serpent bites on its own, so too Samson fought and killed on his own. Another interpretation is that just as a serpent doesn't die if it is bitten on its tail or belly, because it only dies if it is bitten on the head (as it says, "You will strike his head," Genesis 3:15), so too Samson, when he was bound with his hands and feet, and his strength was not known, as soon as his hair was cut, his strength left him (Judges 16:19). Yet, even so, he bit the heels of a horse and its rider fell backward (Genesis 49:17), as he grasped both pillars and brought the house down (Judges 16:29), and Jacob exclaimed, "I have waited for Your salvation, O Lord" (Genesis 49:18). "Gad, a troop shall tramp upon him" (ibid. v. 19) refers to Elijah, who crushed the gang of a certain ruler. "He shall provide the first part for himself" (ibid. v. 20) refers to Asher, whose land produces rich fruits and excellent oil, and he brings olive oil as an offering (ibid.). "Naphtali is a hind let loose" (ibid. v. 21) refers to all those who study the Torah and are beloved to the Almighty like deer, as it says, "A loving hind and a graceful doe" (Proverbs 5:19). "Joseph is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a fountain" (Genesis 49:22). When Pharaoh heard Joseph's interpretation of his dreams, he said that Joseph was wise and discerning (Genesis 41:39). "His eyes are darker than wine" (Genesis 49:12) refers to Joseph's children, whom the other tribes did not begrudge, and the children of Joseph say to Joshua, "We are a numerous people and God has blessed us until now" (Joshua 17:14). Joshua said to them, "This is what you say, and yet you are not afraid of the evil eye?" They replied, "Jacob our father already prayed for us that the evil eye should not rule over us, as it is said, 'Against me [Jacob] was the evil eye' (Genesis 49:27), and Benjamin is compared to a wolf that tears (Genesis 49:27). In the Temple, which was built within its borders, they would sacrifice there one lamb, etc. (Numbers 28:4). Once he blessed each person according to their needs, he made them into tribes, as it is said, 'These are the tribes of Israel' (Genesis 49:28). He said to them, "Behold, I have blessed you," as it is said, 'And this is what their father spoke to them and blessed them' (Genesis 49:28). A faithful man will come and seal my blessings, and who is this? It is Moses, as it is said, 'And this is the blessing with which Moses blessed' (Deuteronomy 33:1)."

“Simeon and Levi are brothers; weapons of villainy are their heritage” (Genesis 49:5) “Simeon and Levi are brothers” – brothers of Dina but not brothers of Joseph. “Weapons of villainy are their heritage [mekheroteihem]” – he said to them: These weapons in your possession have been stolen by you. For whom are they fitting? It is for mekheroteihem – for Esau, who sold [makhar] the birthright. “Let my soul not come in their company; with their assembly let my glory not be associated; for in their anger they killed men, and with their will they hamstrung oxen” (Genesis 49:6). “Let my soul not come in their company” – when they come to take counsel in Shitim. (When the Israelite men engaged in harlotry with the Midianite women, in Shitim, one of their leaders, who encouraged this practice, was the prince of the tribe of Simeon, Zimri son of Salu.) “With their assembly let my glory not be associated” – when they assemble against Moses in the congregation of Koraḥ. (In these instances, when the Torah identifies the perpetrators of these crimes, who descended from the tribes of Simeon and Levi, the verses do not mention that they are sons of Jacob. ) “With their assembly let my glory not be associated” – but for the platform, let my name be associated, when his descendants stand on the platform, (When the Levites stand on the platform to sing as part of the Temple service. ) as it is stated: “These are those who stood, and their sons, [from the sons of the Kehatites:] Heiman [the singer, son of Yoel, son of Samuel]” (I Chronicles 6:18). Rabbi Huna, Rabbi Ḥanina, and Rabbi Pinḥas: The three of them said: “Son of Yitzhar, son of Kehat, son of Levi, son of Israel” (I Chronicles 6:23). (In the verse regarding the congregation of Koraḥ, his lineage is traced only as far as Levi, but here the lineage is traced back to Jacob.) “For in their anger they killed men [ish]” (The Hebrew ish is in the singular.) – this is Ḥamor father of Shekhem. “Hamstrung [ikeru] oxen [shor]” – they undermined [akartun] the security wall [shuran] of proselytes. (As a result of the massacre following the circumcision of the residents of Shekhem, all proselytes will fear that perhaps the same will befall them after their circumcision.) Rabbi Ḥunya and Rabbi Yirmeya in the name of Rabbi Aḥiya bar Abba: As it is written: “And with their will they hamstrung [ikeru] oxen” – in order to fulfill the will of your inclination, you undermined [akartem] the security wall of proselytes. “Undermined a trough” – this is one of the matters that they emended for King Ptolemy. (The seventy-two elders assembled by King Ptolemy introduced several emendations into the translation of the Torah into Greek (see Megilla 9a). One of them was that instead of writing, “killed men…and hamstrung oxen,” they wrote, “killed oxen…and undermined troughs,” so Ptolemy would not deem them murderers.) “Cursed be their anger, as it is fierce, and their wrath, as it is harsh; I will divide them in Jacob, and I will disperse them in Israel” (Genesis 49:7). “Cursed be their anger, as it is fierce” – Rabbi Ḥunya and Rabbi Azarya in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: [Jacob] increased the number of hot-tempered bohaknin (These were individuals afflicted with bohak, a skin condition characterized by white blotches on the skin. When the blotches appeared on the face, this was considered a sign that the individual was hot-tempered. ) among them. That is what is said regarding one who is afflicted with bohak patches, that he is hot-tempered. Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: [This is analogous] to a king who had a son, and the king foresaw that a serpent was destined to bite his son. He said: May the serpent that seeks to bite my son be cursed. So, [Jacob] came to curse them, but he cursed their anger. “Cursed be their anger, as it is fierce, and their wrath [ve’evratam], as it is harsh” – and their transgression [vaaveratam], as it is harsh. (He did not curse them; rather, he cursed the anger and the transgression that was caused by that anger.) “I will divide them [aḥalkem] in Jacob” – this is the tribe of Levi: “I am your portion [ḥelkekha] and your inheritance” (Numbers 18:20). “And I will disperse them in Israel” – this is the tribe of Simeon. That is what is said: Most of the poor were from the tribe of Simeon. Rabbi Tanḥuma said: Although we explain and say: “And the cities that you shall give from the holding of the children of Israel, [from the greater you shall increase and from the lesser you shall decrease]” (Numbers 35:8), six cities, they and their open land, all of them were from Simeon. (The Torah states that forty-eight cities were to be given to the Levites (Numbers 35:7–8). Of these, nine were from the tribes of Judah and Simeon (Joshua 21:9-16). The midrash states that six of them were from Simeon and only three from Judah, despite the fact that Simeon was a small tribe and had only seventeen cities.) When they saw that he was rebuking them, (When the rest of Jacob’s sons saw that he had rebuked Reuben, Simeon, and Levi.) they began departing to the corners. When he saw that they were departing to the corners, he began calling each and every one.

“Simeon and Levi are brothers; weapons of villainy are their heritage” (Genesis 49:5). Reuben went out and his ears were slumped. [Jacob] began calling: “Simeon and Levi are brothers” – brothers for degradation. He said to them: ‘You were brothers for Dina, as it is written: “Two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dina’s brothers, each took his sword” (Genesis 34:25), but not brothers for Joseph, as you sold him.’ Rabbi Simlai said: In Reuben’s regard it is written: “In order to deliver him from their hand, to restore him to his father” (Genesis 37:22). Reuben was not involved in Joseph’s sale. Judah, too, said to them: “What profit [is there if we kill our brother]?” (Genesis 37:26). These were the eldest; consequently, the two of them sold him. (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah were the oldest sons of Jacob. If Reuben and Judah were not involved in the sale, it must have been Simeon and Levi who organized it. ) Know that it is so, for when they descended to Egypt, [Joseph] took from them none other than Simeon, as it is stated: “He took Simeon from them [and incarcerated him before their eyes]” (Genesis 42:24). That is why [Jacob] called the two of them as one. “Weapons of villainy” – what are weapons of villainy? He said to them: ‘They have been stolen by you; they are not yours. They belong to Esau, in whose regard it is written: “By your sword you shall live”’ (Genesis 27:40). Those are weapons of villainy, and villainy is none other than Esau, as it is stated: “For the villainy to your brother Jacob” (Obadiah 1:10). (Thus, Jacob was saying that the weapons of Simeon and Levi belong to Esau, who is the subject of the verse in Obadiah. ) “Their heritage [mekheroteihem]” – Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is a Greek expression, makhirin, makhirin>. Some say: “Mekhuroteihen” – their residences [meguroteihem], just as it says: “Your origins [mekhorotayikh] and your birthplace” (Ezekiel 16:3). “Let my soul not come in their company; with their assembly let my glory not be associated; for in their anger they killed men, and with their will they hamstrung oxen” (Genesis 49:6). “Let my soul not come in their company” – when Zimri will arise and perform that act with Kozbi, let my name not be mentioned there, as it is stated: “The name of the man of Israel who was slain…[Zimri, son of Salu, a prince of a patrilineal house of the Simeonites]” (Numbers 25:14). (The name of Jacob is not mentioned. ) “With their assembly let my glory not be associated” – when Koraḥ will assemble his congregation to dispute, let my name not be associated with them, but rather, “Koraḥ, son of Yitzhar, son of Kehat, son of Levi” (Numbers 16:1), but it did not say: “Son of Jacob.” “For in their anger they killed men [ish]” – did they kill one man [ish]; is it not written: “They killed all the males” (Genesis 34:25)? It is that they were all considered before the Holy One blessed be He like one man. Likewise it says: “Behold [hen], nations may be regarded like a drop from a bucket…” (Isaiah 40:16). What is hen? In the Greek language, hen is one. Likewise it says: “You will smite Midian as one man” (Judges 6:16). Similarly, “the horse and its rider He cast into the sea” (Exodus 15:1) – like one horse and its rider. (The singular terms are used in order to indicate that God cast all the many horses and riders of the Egyptian army into the sea as though they were just one. ) “Cursed is their anger, as it is fierce, and their wrath, as it is harsh; I will divide them in Jacob, and I will disperse them in Israel” (Genesis 49:7). “Cursed is their anger” – he cursed only their anger. Likewise, the wicked Bilam says: “How will I curse, where God has not cursed” (Numbers 23:8)? If at a time of anger he cursed only their anger, can I come to curse them? (If Jacob was angry at Simeon and Levi and yet, with divine spirit, Jacob cursed only their anger and not them, can I, Bilam, curse the Israelites? ) “I will divide them in Jacob” – how so? Twenty-four thousand fell from the tribe of Simeon in [the incident of] Zimri, and its widows were twenty-four thousand. They were divided into two thousand for each and every tribe, as it is stated: “I will divide them in Jacob.” Everyone who circulates among the doorways [to beg] is from the tribe of Simeon. The Holy One blessed be He said: Levi too will circulate. What did the Holy One blessed be He do? He provided him with his sustenance cleanly, and yet Jacob’s edict was fulfilled. The Holy One blessed be He elevated [Levi] and gave him one-tenth, (The first tithe of produce. ) and he circulates and says: ‘Give me my portion.’ That is why it is stated: “I will divide them in Jacob.”

[Another interpretation (of Gen. 49:4): UNSTABLE AS WATER.] Our masters have taught (in Ter. 8:4): THREE LIQUIDS BECOME FORBIDDEN THROUGH BEING UNCOVERED: WATER, WINE, AND MILK. If wine is found uncovered, then one is sorry about it when he pours it out; but in the case of water, if it is found uncovered, one is not sorry for it if he pours it out. So you have done with all the crowns which belonged to me. You have thrown them away AS WATER. < You are as > UNSTABLE AS WATER. When Simeon and Levi came in to Jacob, he reproached (Gk.: kentroun, i.e., “to strike with a goad.”) them. He said (in Gen. 49:5): SIMEON AND LEVI ARE BROTHERS, WEAPONS OF VIOLENCE ARE THEIR MEKHEROT (The meaning of this word is obscure, but the singular, mekherah, resembles the Greek machaira, which means “sword”; and such a meaning fits the context of the midrash. So Tanh., Gen. 12:9; Gen. R. 99 (another version):7 (= p. 1278 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); PRE 38 (in the Amsterdam and Prague editions). The Greek parallel to such an ancient Hebrew word may be due to the fact that swords were common objects of trade.) What are MEKHEROT? WEAPONS OF VIOLENCE.

Then defilest thou it—he went up to my couch (ibid. 49:4). (He slept with Bilah, his father’s concubine.) He went up implies that you will be rejected until Moses appears, concerning whom it is written: And Moses went up unto God (Exod. 19:3), and he shall come, and intercede for you, saying: Let Reuben live, and not die (Deut. 33:6). And Reuben went out downcast. And he (Jacob) began to call out: Simeon and Levi are brothers (Gen. 49:5). They had acted as brothers toward Dinah but not toward Joseph, whom they had sold.

"I will act wisely on the innocent way. Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Nehemiah. Rabbi Judah says, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, "Appoint for Me a priest." Moses said to Him, "What tribe?" He replied to him, "Do not put Reuben before Me, who sinned with Bilhah, his father's concubine, as it is said (Genesis 35:22), 'And Reuben went and lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine.' " He said to him, "From the tribe of Simeon." He said to him, "They are engaged in violence, which I hate, as it is said (Genesis 49:5), 'Simeon and Levi are brothers, weapons of violence are their wares.' " He said to him, "How about the tribe of Dan?" He said to him, "They will cause My anger, for they are idolaters, as it is said (Zechariah 10:11), 'And they shall cross the sea with affliction, and smite the waves in the sea, and all the depths of the Nile shall dry up; and the pride of Assyria shall be brought down, and the scepter of Egypt shall depart.' " This is a reference to the image of Micah. Moses therefore warned Israel (Deuteronomy 29:17), "Lest there be among you a man or woman or family or tribe." And it is said (Judges 18:30), "And the children of Dan set up the graven image for themselves." He said to him, "How about the tribe of Joseph?" He said to him, "They speak evil behind their brethren's backs, as it is said (Genesis 37:2), 'And Joseph brought evil tales of them unto their father.' " He said to him, "How about the tribe of Judah?" He said to him, "He is arrogant of eye and wide of heart, as it is said (Genesis 38:15), 'And Judah saw her, and thought her to be a harlot.' " Moses then said, "Whose tribe, then, shall I appoint?" He replied, "Appoint for yourself from your own tribe." Rabbi Nehemiah said, "And there are those who say it in the name of Resh Lakish, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, 'One who serves Me in this world will serve Me in the World to Come, and will not sit in the midst of My house.' " Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said, "A person must be modest within his own home, and needless to say in the home of his friend."

Simeon and Levi were moved by a great zeal on account of the immorality, as it is said, "And they said, Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?" (Gen. 34:31). And each man took his sword and slew all the men of Shechem. When Jacob heard thereof, he became sorely afraid. For he said: Now all the people of the land will hear, and they will gather together against me || and smite me. He began to curse the wrath of his sons, as it is said, "Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce" (Gen. 49:7); and he also cursed their sword in the Greek language, for he said: "Weapons of violence are their swords" (Gen. 49:5). All the kings of the earth heard (thereof) and feared very much, saying: If two sons of Jacob have done all these great things, if they all band themselves together, they will be able to destroy the world. And the dread of the Holy One, blessed be He, fell upon them, as it is said, "And the terror of God was upon the cities,… and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob" (Gen. 35:5).

Rashbi’s idea adds even more to the significance of Kever Rachel in Beit Lechem, especially since we Jews are predominantly the children of Leah! (Sefer Ezra presents only Yehuda, Levi and Binyamin returning to rebuild the second Beit HaMikdash. ) Rachel Imeinu adopting us as her children, crying and pleading on our behalf before Hashem at our most critical moments, is even more meaningful in light of the fact that we are predominantly the descendants of Yehuda and Levi (see Rashi to Bereishit 49:5). These were the brothers who harmed Yosef the most. Rachel Imeinu looks beyond this and extends her bountiful love to us in a profoundly moving act of self-transcendence. No wonder why she is the most beloved of all of the imahot. (The indelible memory of my visit to Kever Rachel at the age of thirteen and my mother weeping at “Mama Rachel’s” kever brings me to tears. I also vividly recall my mother looking at the grain fields of Beit Lechem, which our tour bus passed, remarking with awe that these were very possibly the fields where Rut gathered the grain (it certainly was the correct area).)

וללוי אמר תמיך ואוריך לאיש חסידך, "And concerning Levi he said: "Let your Tummim and your Urim be with Your faithful one." This is a prayer that Levi should continue forever to be qualified to perform the respective duties of the Levites and the priests.

אשר נסיתו במסה, "whom You have tested at Massah." Seeing that Jacob (Genesis 49,5) had expressed himself negatively concerning any union of Shimon and Levi, cursing their anger, Moses goes on record to say that in the meantime the Levites had proved at Massah that they (by themselves) did not display anger and transgress G'd's commands. Instead of having tested G'd's patience there (Exodus 17,7) where the people questioned G'd's ability to provide them with water) as had the other tribes, this tribe had stood the test of loyalty (and had not participated in that complaint). [There may be an allusion to this in that paragraph as at the beginning the Torah speaks about the whole community arriving at that place whereas when speaking about who complained the word "whole" is absent. Ed.]

ויקח מאתם את שמעון, “he took from amongst them Shimon.” He kept Shimon in jail longer than the other brothers in order to keep him apart from Levi. He remembered that when it came to killing the males of the town of Shechem, Shimon and Levi had acted as a team. Yaakov referred to the matter on his deathbed when he said (Genesis 49,5-6) “Shimon and Levi are brothers (comrades), violence is their stock-in trade.” When the Torah writes in 42, 27: “The one opened his sack,” the words “the one” are a reference to Levi the other half of that team of brothers. Seeing the brothers had not been prepared to select one of their number who should remain behind as a hostage that they would return with Binyamin, Joseph had to make the selection himself. From this incident our sages derived an important ruling, i.e. that when Gentiles demand from Israelites that they hand over one of their number without specifying which person they are to hand over, that the Israelites must not make such a selection but must rather all face death than to condemn someone in their midst. (If however, the Gentiles selected a particular individual from amongst the Israelites and they threaten to kill all the Israelites unless that individual is handed over, the Israelites (in order to save their lives) must hand over the individual demanded from them) (Jerusalem Talmud Terumot 5,4). There is a well known example in Samuel II 20, 1-22 when Sheva ben Bichri, a rebel against the regime of King David, happened to be trapped amongst other Jews and David had given orders to liquidate this Sheva ben Bichri as a dangerous rebel. His commander-in-chief Yoav and his brother Avishai had surrounded the town in which Sheva ben Bichri found himself. A woman in that town saved the other townsfolk by persuading them to hand over the rebel and thus to save the inhabitants of the town from becoming victims of Yoav’s army. [This was during the period of Avshalom’s uprising against his father. Ed.]

AND THE SONS OF JACOB ANSWERED SHECHEM AND HAMOR HIS FATHER WITH SUBTLETY. Now Hamor and Shechem spoke to her father and her brothers, (Verse 11 here.) but the patriarch did not answer them at all as his sons spoke in his place on this matter out of respect for him for since the affair was a source of shame to them, they did not want him to speak about it at all. There is a question which may be raised here. It would appear that they answered with the concurrence of her father and his advice for they were in his presence, and it was he who understood the answer which they spoke with subtlety, and, if so, why was he angry afterwards? (Further, Verse 30. See also Ramban further, 49:5.) Moreover, it is inconceivable that Jacob would have consented to give his daughter in marriage to a Canaanite who had defiled her. Now surely all the brothers gave that answer with subtlety, while Simeon and Levi alone executed the deed, and the father cursed only their wrath. (Genesis 49:7.) [But if all the brothers shared responsibility for the answer and the plan, why did Jacob single out only Simeon and Levi for chastisement?] The answer is that the craftiness lay in their saying that every male of theirs be circumcised, (Verse 15 here.) as they thought that the people of the city will not consent to it. Even if perchance they will listen to their prince and they will all become circumcised, they will come on the third day, when they were in pain, (Verse 25 here.) and will take their daughter (“Daughter.” in Tur: “sister.”) from the house of Shechem. Now this was the advice of all the brothers and with the permission of their father, but Simeon and Levi wanted to take revenge of them and so they killed all the men of the city. It is possible that Jacob’s anger in cursing their wrath (Genesis 49:7.) was because they killed the men of the city who had committed no sin against him; they should have killed Shechem alone. It is this which Scripture says, And the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father with subtlety, and spoke, because he had defiled Dinah their sister, for they all agreed to speak to him craftily because of the base deed which he had done to them. Now many people ask: “But how did the righteous sons of Jacob commit this deed, spilling innocent blood?” The Rabbi (Moshe ben Maimon) answered in his Book of Judges, (Hilchoth Melachim, IX, 14, with slight textual changes. The Book of Judges is the last of the fourteen books which comprise Maimonides’ great life work: The Mishneh Torah, or Yad Hachazakah.) saying that “sons of Noah” (Or “a Noachide,” a term denoting the human race. See Seder Bereshith, Note 222.) are commanded concerning Laws, and thus they are required to appoint judges in each and every district to give judgment concerning their six commandments (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) which are obligatory upon all mankind. “And a Noachide who transgresses one of them is subject to the death-penalty by the sword. If he sees a person transgressing one of these seven (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) laws and does not bring him to trial for a capital crime, he who saw him is subject to the same death-penalty. It was on account of this that the people of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty because Shechem committed an act of robbery and they saw and knew of it, but they did not bring him to trial.” But these words do not appear to me to be correct for if so, our father Jacob should have been the first to obtain the merit of causing their death, and if he was afraid of them, why was he angry at his sons and why did he curse their wrath a long time after that and punish them by dividing them and scattering them in Israel? (Genesis 49:7.) Were they not meritorious, fulfilling a commandment and trusting in G-d Who saved them? In my opinion, the meaning of “Laws” which the Rabbis have counted among their seven Noachidic commandments (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) is not just that they are to appoint judges in each and every district, but He commanded them concerning the laws of theft, overcharge, wronging, and a hired man’s wages; the laws of guardians of property, forceful violation of a woman, seduction, principles of damage and wounding a fellowman; laws of creditors and debtors, and laws of buying and selling, and their like, similar in scope to the laws with which Israel was charged, and involving the death-penalty for stealing, wronging or violating or seducing the daughter of his fellowman, or kindling his stack, or wounding him, and their like. And it is also included in this commandment that they appoint judges for each and every city, just as Israel was commanded to do, (Deuteronomy 16:18.) but if they failed to do so they are free of the death-penalty since this is a positive precept of theirs [and failing to fulfill a positive precept does not incur the death-penalty]. The Rabbis have only said: (Sanhedrin 57a.) “For violation of their admonishments there is the death-penalty,” and only a prohibition against doing something is called an “admonishment.” And such is the purport of the Gemara in Tractate Sanhedrin. (58b. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 192.) And in the Jerusalem Talmud (Not found in our editions. See my Hebrew commentary, ibid.) they have said: “With respect to Noachide laws, a judge who perverts justice is to be slain. If he took a bribe he is to be slain. With respect to Jewish laws, [if after having heard both parties] you know perfectly well what the proper legal decision should be, you are not permitted to withdraw from the case without rendering a decision, and if you know that it is not perfectly clear to you, you may withdraw from the case. But with respect to their laws, even though you know the law perfectly well you may withdraw from it.” From this it would appear that a non-Jewish judge may say to the litigants, “I am not beholden to you,” for it is only in Israel that there is an additional admonishment — “Lo thaguru’ (ye shall not be afraid) of the face of any man, (Deuteronomy 1:17.) meaning, “You shall not gather in, [i.e., restrain], your words before any man” (Sanhedrin 6b. This explanation is based upon the common root of the words thaguru and ogeir (gathering) as in the expression, gathering in summer, (Proverbs 10:5).) — and surely he is not to be slain for failing to make himself chief, overseer, or ruler (Proverbs 6:7. ) in order to judge superiors. [Ramban thus disagrees with Rambam, who writes that the people of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty by not having brought Shechem to justice.] Moreover, why does the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] have to seek to establish their guilt? Were not the people of Shechem and all seven nations (Deuteronomy 7:1.) idol worshippers, perpetrators of unchaste acts, and practitioners of all things that are abominable to G-d? In many places Scripture loudly proclaims concerning them: Upon the high mountains, and upon their hills, and under every leafy tree, etc.; (Ibid., 12:2.) Thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations, etc.? (Ibid., 18:9.) For all these abominations have the men of the land done, etc. (Leviticus 18:27.) However, it was not the responsibility of Jacob and his sons to bring them to justice. But the matter of Shechem was that the people of Shechem were wicked [by virtue of their violation of the seven Noachide laws] (The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc.) and had thereby forfeited their lives. Therefore Jacob’s sons wanted to take vengeance of them with a vengeful sword, and so they killed the king and all the men of his city who were his subjects, obeying his commands. The covenant represented by the circumcision of the inhabitants of Shechem had no validity in the eyes of Jacob’s sons for it was done to curry favor with their master [and did not represent a genuine conversion]. But Jacob told them here that they had placed him in danger, as it is said, You have troubled me, to make me odious, (Verse 30 here.) and there, (Genesis 49:7.) [i.e., at the time he blessed the other children], he cursed the wrath of Simeon and Levi for they had done violence to the men of the city whom they had told in his presence, And we will dwell with you, and we will become one people. (Verse 16 here.) They would have chosen to believe in G-d and trust their word, and perhaps they might have indeed returned to G-d and thus Simeon and Levi killed them without cause for the people had done them no evil at all. It is this which Jacob said, Weapons of violence are their kinship. (Genesis, 49:5.) And if we are to believe in the book, ‘The Wars of the Sons of Jacob,’ (This is the Midrash Vayisu. See Eisenstein, Otzar Midrashim, p. 157, and L. Ginzberg’s, The Legends of the Jews, Vol. I, pp. 404-411.) their father’s fear was due to the fact that the neighbors of Shechem gathered together and waged three major wars against them, and were it not for their father who also donned his weapons and warred against them, they would have been in danger, as is related in that book. Our Rabbis have mentioned something of this conflict in their commentary on the verse, Which I took out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow. (Further, 48:22.) They said, (As quoted here, the comment appears in Rashi, ibid. See also Bereshith Rabbah 80:9.) “All the surrounding nations gathered together to join in battle against them, and Jacob donned his weapons to war against them,” just as Rashi writes there. (Further, 48:22.) Scripture, however, is brief about this because it was a hidden miracle, (See Ramban above, 17:1. ) for the sons of Jacob were valiant men, and it appeared as if their own arm saved them. (Psalms 44:4.) Scripture is similarly brief about the matter of Abraham in Ur of the Chaldees, (See Ramban above, 11:58.) and it did not at all mention Esau’s wars with the Horites. Instead, Scripture mentions here that there was the terror of G-d upon the cities that were round them, (Further, 35:5.) and they did not all assemble to pursue after the sons of Jacob (Further, 35:5.) for they would have fallen upon them as the sand which is on the sea-shore in multitude. (I Samuel 13:5.) And this is the meaning of the terror of G-d, (Further, 35:5.) for the terror and dread (See Exodus 15:16.) of the military prowess they had seen fell upon them. Therefore Scripture says, And Jacob came to Luz… he and all the people that were with him, (Further, 35:6.) in order to inform us that not one man among them or their servants was lost in warfare. (See Numbers 31:49.)

your dwelling place Heb. מְכֹרֹתַיִך, like מְגוּרוֹתַיִךְ, your dwelling place [interchanging כ and ג], and Menachem (p. 110) connected the word to the idea of birth. He similarly explained (Gen. 49: 5): “weapons of violence are their birth (מְכֵרוֹתֵיהֶם)” (Deut. 18:8); “besides what he has from his birth (מִמְכָּרָיו)” (II Kings 12:6); “each one from his kinsman (מַכָּרוֹ).” They all mean birth.

Was too large for them. It was more than was their due. (Various reasons are presented why Shimon was given part of their inheritance in the midst of Yehudah’s territory. Some say that Shimon helped Yehudah conquer their land and therefore merited to receive some of it as their own. Others maintain that this was because Yaakov had said: “Shimon and Levi are brothers, instruments of violence are their wares. I will disperse them throughout Yaakov and scatter them throughout Israel.” (Bereishis 49:5,7) Shimon was given a portion within Yehudah and Levi was scattered throughout many cities in the land.)

Technically, there is no comparison between Moshe’s taking a foreign woman before the Torah was given and Zimri’s doing so afterward. Nevertheless, in view of Shimon and Levi’s history regarding pre-Sinaitic intermarriage, it is likely that Zimri was making a meta-legal point. Since Levi had so strongly opposed this very notion in the past, and Moshe, the Levite national leader, was now betraying the cause, (At this point in time, there were none of the extenuating circumstances of earlier days that might have made intermarriage more understandable, since the Jews were now a large enough group to no longer have any practical need for it.) it was up to the leader of Shimon to protest. For up until this point it appears that there was an unspoken agreement between these two tribes to take difficult stands when such was called for; they had continued in their zealotry even though their actions had been challenged by their father twice (Bereshit 34:30 and Bereshit 49:5-7).

Shimon’s difficulties begin with his progenitor. Shimon, the second-born of Ya’akov, who is one of the three sons rebuked by their father on his deathbed (the other two being Reuven and Levi). In Shimon’s case, Ya’akov’s censure (Bereshit 49:5-7) has a strong and lasting effect. It ends up foreshadowing the inability of most of his descendants to create an adaptive approach to life both in the desert and in the Land of Israel, the net result of which would be the tribe’s dissociation from the rest of the people. By the time we get to the end of the Torah and the next set of tribal blessings (Devarim 33), we see even better where things are going: Moshe doesn’t even mention him, thereby singularly excluding Shimon from the blessings he gives to the tribes at the end of his life and setting the stage for the latter’s ultimate disintegration soon thereafter.

We are left to interpretive innovation, introduced compassionately by Rashi, to grasp at some notion of Simeon’s saving grace. In the context of Jacob’s “blessing” to Simeon, Rashi comments that Simeon brought forth schoolteachers needed by Israel. (Rashi’s source is unclear. His exegesis may have stemmed from midrashic sources like BR 99:7 and Tan. VaYeĥi 10, which indicated that the tribe would be destitute, forced to wander and beg. Linking such a poor lifestyle with the usual meager income afforded a primary school teacher was natural. Rashi may have played off of these sources, as well as Deuteronomy 33:10, which identified the Levites as the nation’s teaching rank. Since Simeon and Levi were “blessed” together by Jacob as being scattered among the tribes, Rashi might have attributed the positive consequence of such an adverse situation – namely, being available to attend to the national need for gifted schoolteachers – to the brother of the natural-born educators, the Levites. For further discussion of their shared spiritual strengths, see Sefat Emet, VaYeĥi 5647. Interestingly, the Church Fathers Tertullian (Adversus Marcion, 3:18 and Adversus Judaios, 10) and Hippolytus (on Genesis 49:5) likewise mentioned the tradition that Pharisees and scribes belonged to the tribes of Simeon and Levi.)

“Simeon and Levi are a pair” [49:5]. You were brothers to your sister Dinah that you risked your lives for Dinah’s sake. However, with Joseph you were no brothers. That is to say, they did not act like brothers when they threw him into the pit and afterwards sold him. Therefore, when the brothers later came to Egypt to Joseph, Joseph threw Simeon into prison before all of his brothers. Joseph did this so that Simeon should have expiation for his sin that he sold Joseph. (Bahya, Genesis, 49:5.)

[200] And the champions who stand ready to repel such profane and impure ways of thinking are two in number, Simeon and Levi, but they are one in will. That is why in the blessings, while their father ranked them under a single head (Gen. 49:5), because their minds are in concord and harmony and their purpose set in one and the same direction, Moses ceases even to mention the pair, but compresses the whole of Simeon into Levi (Deut. 33:8), and thus blending the two natures he makes them one, bearing the stamp of a single form, and unites hearing with action.

Shimon and Levi are brothers[, mighty men]. Instruments of violence are their wares. [In the land of their residence they did mighty deeds.]

Shimeon and Levi are brothers of the womb, men who are masters of sharp weapons; they made war from their youth; in the land of their adversary they wrought out the triumphs of war.

Shimeon and Levi are brothers of the womb; their thoughts are of sharp weapons for rapine.

Genesis45,22. “he gave to each of them a change of ‎clothes; to Binyamin he gave three hundred silver pieces and ‎five changes of clothes.” Our sags in Megillah 16 ask: ‎‎“is it really possible that Joseph erred in the same way as had his ‎father when he showed Joseph preferential treatment? Was ‎Joseph not aware that by what the Torah describes him as doing ‎for Binyamin, he would arouse the brothers’ jealousy?” They ‎answer that the Torah alluded to the five Royal garments that ‎Mordechai, a descendant of Binyamin would be dressed in as we ‎read in Esther 8,15. Our author, clearly not too enthused with the Talmud’s ‎answer, suggests a different way of understanding the Talmud’s ‎answer. Our sages, understood that Joseph foresaw and hinted to ‎Binyamin that Mordechai, a distant descendant of his brother ‎Binyamin, would play a great part in the miracle of Purim. He ‎intimated that he and Binyamin shared a similar experience, ‎seeing that they were both the sons of the same mother, Rachel. ‎He had attained high rank as a result of someone’s dream ‎‎(Pharaoh’s) and Mordechai also rose to eminence as a result of a ‎dream, as our sages in the Targum on the Book of Esther ‎‎(chapter10) have told us. According to the Targum, on the ‎night when the king could not fall asleep (again), he had been ‎dreaming that Haman wanted to assassinate him. This is why he ‎became angry at Haman and commanded him to dress Mordechai ‎in the Royal robes, and paraded him throughout the capital on ‎the king’s horse. Joseph had been paraded similarly. (41,43) Just ‎as Joseph remained under the rule of Pharaoh at the time, so ‎Mordechai would remain under the rule of Achashverosh. ‎‎(Compare Rashi on 41,40)‎ This is another example of the approach of our sages to the ‎details the Torah has revealed about the lives of our sainted ‎forefathers, i.e. that they always were at pains to perform deeds ‎that foreshadowed future, critical, events in the lives of their ‎descendants. (Our author lists more examples of this theme when ‎relating to Shimon and Levi’s killing the inhabitants of Shechem ‎as being a forerunner of the Hasmoneans in the Chanukkah ‎story). [I will omit the balance of the paragraph as, seeing ‎this portion is also read sometimes on Chanukkah, the author felt ‎compelled to introduce this subject here, although those events ‎occurred in post-biblical times. It is somewhat forced, as it ‎requires us to see in Levi rather than Shimon, the principal ‎activist, otherwise the connection with the Hasmoneans who ‎were priests is too tenuous. Ed.]‎

Regarding this, Yaakov prayed that Korach’s quarrel not harm Moshe Rabbeinu, may he rest in peace. He said (Genesis 49:6), “Let my glory not be joined in their group.” That is, they should not join and bind together their portions of glory which each had, for they were “representatives at the assembly, esteemed men” (Numbers 16:2) [and] important. By their not joining and binding together their portions of glory, Moshe would certainly be able to stand up against them and defeat them.

And, as a result of glory being enhanced, the soul that enhances glory is enhanced. This is because the soul resides in glory, in the aspect of “Let my soul not enter their plot, [let my glory not be included in their assembly]” (Genesis 49:6). Then, as a result of his name and his soul being enhanced, all the souls long to be encompassed in his soul and name, as mentioned above.

5. And via the revelation of the glory [of God] comes the spread of prophecy. This is because prophecy stems from the root souls of Israel. These are the seventy souls, as in B’shivim Nefesh Yordu Avotekha (“With seventy souls did your fathers go down”) (Deuteronomy 10:22)—the first letters of which spell NaVYE. And the root of the souls is glory, as in “Let my soul not enter their plot, let my glory not be included in their assembly” (Genesis 49:6). Therefore, the revelation of the glory, the root of the souls, brings to the spread of prophecy.

In Bereishis 49:5-6, Yaakov says, "Shimon and Levi are brothers; in their 'secret,' my soul should not enter." Rashi explains this refers to the incident where the tribe of Shimon confronted Moshe about his marriage to a Midianite woman. Why did Rashi highlight this seemingly negative behavior? Since it is called a "secret," it suggests that Shimon and Levi did not approach Moshe brazenly, like wicked people. Instead, they aimed to elevate negative forces to holiness, similar to Moshe's actions. However, not everyone can claim such a right. Shimon and Levi had the power to elevate everything to holiness. This is why they are called אחים, connected to the idea of “אחות לנו קטנה" (we have a young sister), which means to bind and connect (Midrash Lech Lecha, Bereishis Rabbah 39:3). However, this power needed to come from all of Klal Yisrael. Therefore, Yaakov spread them out among the nation, and this power remained with the tribe of Levi and Moshe, who led the entire nation. Perhaps through the sale of Yosef, instigated by Shimon and Levi, they compromised this ability. Yaakov said, "Through their anger, they killed an ox (Yosef)." Despite this, Yaakov's words to the tribes were blessings, as stated, "And Yaakov blessed them," each according to his mission. By spreading Shimon and Levi among Klal Yisrael, Yaakov ensured they could influence the entire nation and fulfill their mission properly.

There are those who criticize the Rambam for his commentary on the Ta’amei HaMitzvot (the meaning of the commandments), for at first glance it seems to give weak explanations. They dwell at length with such accusations. Besides that which is known to anyone possessing understanding, that the Rambam would conceal the depth of his intentions in the beauty of his language, and the depth of meaning is far more than what it seems to be in its external form, yet in addition to this, there is nothing irregular or strange about his words even at their face value. We have a principle, that all teachings on the Torah and mitzvot are dressed in the meager garments of this world. Who do we have who is greater than the RaDbaZ (Rabbi David ben Zimra, 1480-1573), who was both a master of the Talmud and a tremendous kabbalist, a leader of his generation? And in his work on the Ta’amei HaMiszvot, he introduces each commandment by quoting the Rambam’s explanation of its meaning as the basis from which to begin understanding. Then, for most of the mitzvot, the RaDbaZ explains the meaning provided by the Rambam according to the true inner meaning in the Kabbalah. Anyone who possesses understanding will clearly know that simple revealed meaning and the inner mystery are one, and join together as one. Anyone who asserts that the inner mystery is something other that the pshat, (פשט - Simple revealed meaning.) of him it is said (Bereshit, 49:6), “let my soul not come into their council.” Even in a place where the RaDbaZ differed in his explanation from the Rambam, still he did not reject the Rambam’s words. Rather, he said that in this place the Rambam did not say enough, and it must be explained according to the sod. (סוד – the secret, or inner mystery.) God willing, we will go on to explain how the simple revealed meaning is itself the inner meaning according to the mysteries of the Torah.

1. Simeon and Levi are a pair; etc., for in their anger they slew a man, and in their self-will, they lamed an ox. Ramban explained, they slew a man, is all the men of Shekhem; an ox, is the dynasty of Shekhem and Chamor. And behold all of the brothers answered with deception in front of Jacob, that [the people of Shekhem] should circumcise themselves. However, Ramban wrote that their intention was [only] to kill Shekhem and Chamor, who sinned, and to release Dinah from the house of Shekhem and [then] to go on their way. However, Simeon and Levi alone took counsel to kill the whole city, which had not sinned. But behold Jacob testified about Simeon and Levi, that, God forbid, that they went for three days with [this] evil counsel. Rather, their opinion was like all of the [other] brothers. However, at the last minute, when they approached to release Dinah and to kill Shekhem, their rage flared and they killed all the people of the city like a single man. So in their self-will – when they were not in their anger but rather with their own will, all of the three days – they only slew an ox, meaning Shekhem and Chamor. Hence their sin was not so great. Therefore, their blessing is To their council, may my soul never come. Its explanation is that since it is from this sin that the sin of Korah’s company gets its spark, from Levi; and Zimri, the son of Salu from Simeon, Jacob prayed about them, that their punishment should nevertheless not reach so far that it would reach Jacob’s sould, God forbid. And it is like my teacher, the Haflaah wrote, And Korah took (Numbers 16:1) the holy flow from Yitzhar and Kehat and Levi [all of whom are mentioned in the verse as his ancestors], but it did not reach Jacob [who is not mentioned]. And likewise, Zimri the son of Salu, the chieftain of a paternal house of the Simeonites (Numbers 25:14), but it did not reach Jacob. For then, God forbid, there would be no rectification for them. It then comes out that this was a blessing for them.

בקהלם, “in their counsel,” (may my soul not take part) there is no prefix letter ו here as we find in the word וברצונם, “and when they are well disposed;” Yaakov shuns being associated with their plans under any circumstances.

עקרו שור, “they uprooted an ox;” according to the Targum Yerushalmi, this is an allusion to their having sold Joseph. Joseph had elsewhere been compared to an ox, as opposed to his brother Yehudah, who had been likened to a lion. (Deuteronomy chapter 33) An alternate exegesis: according to Onkelos, the word שור here symbolises a חומה, wall, this was accomplished by exchanging the vowel cholem for the vowel shuruk. The wall referred to would be that around the city of Sh’chem.

LET MY SOUL NOT COME INTO THEIR COUNCIL. Rabbi Aaron (Gaon of the school of Pumbedita. The great Hai Gaon was among his students.) explained the word tavo (come) in Let my soul not come (tavo) as having the meaning of set like the meaning of ba (goeth down, to set) in and the sun goeth down (ba) (Eccles. 1:5). (The word ba means to come. In Eccles. 1:5 the word ba means sets, i.e., when the sun goes down (sets) it is no longer in the sky. Similarly the word tavo, which comes from the same root, here means will set. Let my soul not set from their council means let my soul always be in their council.) He interpreted let my soul not come into their council as meaning, I do not want to be outside of their council. However, Rabbi Aaron’s interpretation inverts the meaning of the verse. (Rabbi Aaron interpreted Let my soul not come in to their council to mean let my soul not set from their council. The verse means I do not want my soul to be in their council. Thus Rabbi Aaron’s interpretation is precisely the opposite of what the verse actually says.) If Jacob praised Simeon and Levi, why did he mention weapons of violence? Furthermore, Jacob told his sons, Ye have troubled me, to make me odious unto the inhabitants of the land (Gen. 34:30). (We thus see that Jacob was angry at what his sons did to the inhabitants of Shechem and on his deathbed would not praise them for this act.) The truth of the matter is that Simeon and Levi placed Jacob and his household in great jeopardy by their actions in Shechem. Indeed, were it not for the terror of God that was upon the cities that were round about them (Gen. 35:5), they would have surrounded Jacob and his family and exterminated them all. He (Rabbi Aaron) similarly explained (That is, in a positive manner, not that Jacob castigated his sons but praised them for slaying the inhabitants of Shechem and destroying its wall. Rabbi Aaron interprets verses 6-7 as follows: Let my soul not set from their council, from their assembly let my glory not be excluded; For in their anger they slew men, and in their self-will they uprooted a cursed wall; For their anger was fierce, and their wrath it was cruel. Rabbi Aaron interprets verse 8 as follows: I will give them a good portion in Jacob (achallekem be-ya’akov) and may they multiply in Israel (va-afitzem bi’yisra’el) (Filwarg).) Cursed be their anger (v. 7) as meaning and in their self will they uprooted a cursed wall, (Rabbi Aaron renders ikkeru shor (they houghed oxen) as they uprooted a wall.) for their anger was fierce. The above explanations are unpalatable. (Literally, cold, i.e., unpalatable as cold food (Krinsky).) Let my soul not come into their council. (I reject them. I.E. takes Jacob’s words and gives them a new twist.) Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen (Rabbi Moses ben Samuel Gikatilla, an 11th century Bible commentator. See I.E. on Gen. 1:26 and the notes thereto.) says that kevodi (my glory) is synonymous with nafshi (my soul). He notes that we find the two often used synonymously in the book of Psalms. Rabbi Moses’ interpretation is correct since our text repeats itself in different words, (The point is that the second half of the line repeats what the first half said but in different words. In the first half it uses nafshi, in the second kevodi. However, both mean one and the same.) as is the style of prophetic statements. We thus find, Ask thy father, and he will declare unto thee, Thine elders, and they will tell thee (Deut. 32:7), and (in Num. 23:8) How shall I curse, whom God hath not cursed? And how shall I execrate, whom the Lord hath not execrated? Thus into their council means the same as unto their assembly, come (tavoh) the same as be united (techad), and nafshi the same as kevodi. However, Rabbi Judah ben Balam the Spaniard (Bible commentator and grammarian who lived in the 10th and 11th centuries. “His commentaries (in Arabic) on most of the Bible are remarkable for their philosophical method and use of comparison with Arabic.” (Cecil Roth, Standard Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 940).) says that Rabbi Moses erred. He maintains that kavod (glory) refers to the body because the body is the glory (kavod) of the soul in the same way that a necklace is the ornament to the neck, (The body is inferior to the soul, yet it is considered the soul’s glory in the same way that a necklace, although certainly less important than the neck, is nevertheless called the ornament of the neck (Cherez).) as we find in the verse Who satisfieth thy body (edyekh) with good things (Ps. 103:5). (The Hebrew edyekh ordinarily means your ornament. J.P.S. translates it as thine old age. Rabbi Judah Balam interprets edyekh as referring to the body. However, I.E. in Psalms interprets edyekh as referring to the soul.) Rabbi Judah offers as a proof text, (That kavod refers to the body.) Yea, let him lay my glory (kevodi) in the dust. Selah. (Ps. 7:6). (Which proves that glory cannot refer to the soul for it is impossible to lay the soul in the dust.) However, I say that Rabbi Judah errs, for we find Scripture saying, So that my glory (kevodi) may sing praise to Thee (Ps. 30:13), (I.E. interprets this verse in his commentaries on Psalms as follows: So that all that have a soul (kavod) may sing praise to thee. We thus see that kavod refers to the soul. Rabbi Judah might retort that Ps. 30:13 should be interpreted: so that my body may sing praise to thee, or all that have a human form (kavod) may sing praise to thee.) and Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory (kevodi) rejoiceth; My flesh (i.e., my body) also dwelleth in safety (Ps. 16:9). (Kavod must refer to the soul for otherwise body is mentioned twice in our verse. I.E. in Psalms interprets my heart as referring to man’s intelligence, my glory (kevodi) to man’s soul, and my flesh to the body.) As to the proof which Rabbi Judah offered from Yea, let him lay my glory in the dust, it is figurative. What the verse means is that my soul will be lowered as low as possible, i.e., to the dust. Positive proof that my interpretation is correct comes from My soul (nafshi) cleaveth unto the dust (Ps. 119:25). (This verse certainly must be taken figuratively. Similarly, Ps. 119:25.)

BE UNITED. Techad (be united) is related to the word yachad (united). (Its root is yod, chet, dalet.) However, according to Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen, the grammarian of blessed memory, the tzere beneath the tav of techad takes the place of the alef of echad. (That is, its root is alef, chet, dalet.) He similarly explains the word tesham (be desolate) in and that the land be not desolate (tesham) (Gen. 47:19). (Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen says that the root of tesham is alef, shin, mem and the tav is vocalized with a tzere to make up for the dropped alef. I.E. holds that it comes from the root yod, shin, mem. Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 47:19.)

[INTO THEIR COUNCIL.] Be-sodam (into their council) is analogous to be-hivvasedam (while they took council) in while they took council (be-hivvasedam) together against me (Ps. 31:14). (Both words come from the root samekh, vav, dalet (Krinsky) and mean secret council.) The meaning of our verse is: since Simeon and Levi’s weapons are ones of violence (v. 5), Let my soul not come into their council.

THEY SLEW MEN. Scripture employs the term ish (man) generically as it does shor (ox) and chamor (ass) for oxen and asses (Gen. 32:6). They slew men alludes to the inhabitants of the city of Shechem.

OXEN. Shor (oxen) is to be rendered as wall. We similarly read, Its branches run over the wall (shur) (v. 22). I have already explained in my work Moznayim that the cholam and shuruk interchange. (Therefore the fact that our verse reads shor and verse 22 shur presents no problem.)

[HOUGHED.] Ikkeru (houghed) is similar to the word te’akker (hough) in thou shalt hough (te’akker) their horses (Josh. 11:6). (According to I.E. ikkeru shor is to be translated, they uprooted a wall.) This verse shows that Shechem was a large city since it had a wall.

בסודם אל תבא נפשי, "My soul, do not come to their counsel." We need to understand what precisely Jacob had in mind. Our sages in Sanhedrin 109 say that Jacob referred to the affair with Zimri in which the tribe of Shimon disgraced itself, and to the uprising of Korach which was a taint on the tribe of Levi. They also state that the words באפם הרגו איש "in their anger they slew a man," refer to Chamor and the men of Shechem, whereas the words וברצונם עקרו שור, "and it was their wish to uproot an ox," refer to their violence against Joseph (compare Targum Yerushalmi). These comments are all homiletical. One of the difficulties with this explanation is why Jacob would list events that were far in the future ahead of events which had already taken place, such as the violence against Joseph and Chamor? How could the word כי be used in this verse when it does not relate to anything which preceded it? Besides, why would Jacob also associate Levi with the affair in which Zimri would disgrace himself by sleeping with a Midianite princess? Why did Jacob choose the expression ברצונם, "when it pleased them," to describe Shimon and Levi's planned violence against Joseph?

The plain meaning of the verse is that the entire verse speaks about the incident with Joseph. When Jacob refers to בסודם, "their secret," he meant that he did not want to be associated with these two brothers from the moment they began to hate Joseph, although they concealed their hatred for a while. When Jacob spoke about אל תבא נפשי, this was his way of disassociating himself from any guilt concerning the behaviour of Shimon and Levi. Just as he had not transmitted spiritually corrupt genes to Reuben, so he had not burdened Shimon and Levi with spiritually defective genes when he fathered either one of them. Any evil concocted by these two brothers did not originate with him.

Jacob also wanted to state that he would not be punished for anything these two brothers had done because of his preferential treatment of Joseph being an underlying cause of the brothers' jealousy and hatred of him.

When Jacob added: ובקהלם אל תחד כבודי, "my honour do not join their congregation," he referred to the moment when Shimon and Levi hatched the plot to kill Joseph (37,20). He did not want these two sons to be known as "the sons of Jacob" as of that moment. Jacob considered such a designation of these two as an affront to his honour. Tanchuma in Parshat Vayeshev understands the word כבוד as a reference to the presence of the שכינה which had departed from Jacob the moment Joseph had become lost. The word כי in בי באפם הרגו איש, is the justification for Jacob not wanting his name associated with these two brothers. He referred to their having killed a man although we know in retrospect that this did not happen. Jacob considered the brothers' willingness to kill Joseph and to throw him into a pit full of reptiles as equivalent to exposing Joseph to many kinds of deaths.

וברצונם עקרו שור, "and they uprooted an ox at their pleasure." Jacob added that even after their anger had already evaporated, after they had thrown Joseph into the pit and Yehudah spoke words of appeasement to them, they continued to act evilly. The Talmud Sotah 56 states that Joseph should have been the progenitor of 12 tribes. His encounter with the wife of Potiphar whose temptations he withstood only with the greatest amount of willpower caused him to forfeit the privilege of founding the other ten tribes. Had it not been for Shimon and Levi who had wanted to uproot Joseph's future, none of this would have happened.

בסודם אל תבא נפשי. At the time they planned their revenge I had not been taken into their confidence either about what they were going to do or about how they were going to do it. It had not been done at my suggestion. Yaakov repeats what he said in different words, continuing אל תחד כבודי, the word תחד is in the feminine mode seeing it refers to כבוד which is another word for נפש which is a feminine noun.

כי באפם הרגו איש, the word איש refers to people generally, as in Samuel I 14,24 ואיש ישראל נגש, where it also did not refer to a single Israelite but to the Israelite troops who were pressing for action. Yaakov too describes the whole population of the city of Shechem as איש, as if a single unit. We find that the word שור is often used also as a reference to many oxen although it is in the singular mode. Other examples of such constructions are Exodus 15,19 כי בא סוס פרעה, where the Torah speaks of all of Pharaoh’s (Egypt’s) horses, not just of Pharaoh’s personal horse. Some commentators understand the words שור as meaning the ruling prince of the land, Chamor. We have several examples of someone in a high position being referred to as שור, as for instance in Deuteronomy 33,17 בכור שורו. The word עקרו in our verse, is another word for הרגו, “they killed.” The word שור may also mean “wall, fortification,” as understood by Onkelos.

וברצונם, “in order to carry out their will; their urgent desire.” In our homiletic literature, (compare Rashi) the entire line starting with אל תבא is understood as referring to misdeeds carried out by members of the tribe of Shimon in the distant future such as the leader of that tribe Zimri who slept with a Midianirte princess in an act of defiance of Jewish mores, and the infamous Korach of the tribe of Levi who wanted to usurp the position of Moses and Aaron. Due to Yaakov’s express wish here, neither of these two men had his genealogy traced all the way back to Yisrael when the Torah explains who they were. (compare Numbers 16,1 and Numbers 25,15)

FOR IN THEIR ANGER THEY SLEW A MAN AND IN THEIR SELF-WILL THEY DISABLED AN OX (‘SHOR’). The meaning of this is that they committed violence in their wrath in that they were angry at Shechem, and it was to satisfy their own desire and not because of the guilt or sins of the slain. Now Onkelos says that the word shor (ox) should be understood as shur (wall) with a shuruk, (The phonetic equivalent oo. Thus the word should be understood as shur (wall) rather than shor (ox). The Torah-script has no vowel signs, and for the sake of interpretation, a difficult word may sometimes be interpreted as if it were vowelled differently than the traditional reading.) as in the verse, Daughters treaded on the wall (‘shur’). (Verse 22 here.) Thus Onkelos translated the word shor in the present verse as “the wall of the enemy,” similar in expression to the verse: Mine eye also hath gazed on them that lie in wait for me (‘b’shuroi’). (Psalms 92:12. Ramban is thus suggesting that the enemy lies in wait for me behind his fortified walls.) The meaning of the verse is thus: “and they uprooted a city surrounded with a wall, slaying their children and women after having killed the men of the city.” The word ikru (disabled) would then be similar in use to the verse, Ekron shall be rooted up (‘tei’akeir’). (Zephaniah 2:4.) Others (Mentioned in the commentary of R’dak in the name of Rabbi Yaakov the son of Rabbi Elazar.) have explained that the ox, which is the largest of cattle, is an allusion to Hamor and his son Shechem, the prince of the country, (Above, 34:2.) just as in the verses: His firstling bull, majesty is his; (Deuteronomy 33:17.) Ye kine of Bashan, that are in the mountain of Samaria. (Amos 4:1.) Similarly do the verses surname the great princes “rams” (Exodus 15:15. Eilei Moab is generally translated, “the mighty men of Moab,” but literally it means “the rams of Moab.”) and “he-goats.” (Isaiah 14:9. Atudei eretz is generally translated, “the chief ones of the earth,” but literally it means “the he-goats of the earth.”) The correct interpretation appears to me to be that the verse is to be understood in its usual sense as stating that in their anger they killed each man of whom they were wrathful; and in their self-will, after their anger had been calmed by the slaying of the men, they uprooted all oxen, this being an allusion to their cattle and their possessions, including everything that was in the home and everything in the field. Now Jacob mentioned this in order to state that he had no part in all these secret deliberations of theirs, even in the removal of the cattle and possessions, or any aspect of the spoiling and plundering of the people of the city of Shechem. The word ikru [in the expression, ikru shor], has the same meaning as in the verse: Thou shalt hemstring (‘te’akeir’) their horses. (Joshua 11:6.) But the expression and purport is all one.

בסודם אל תבא נפשי, may it be G’d’s will that I will not feature in their plots. Every time we encounter the expression אל, al, in the Torah, it is a curse, a request, or a command. It would therefore be wrong to translate this word here as meaning “I have not been part of their devious plot.”

(2) KI IN THEIR ANGER. Because in their anger.

כי באפם עקרו שור, the word עקרו here has the same meaning as the word תעקר in Joshua 11,6, where G’d promises the Israelites that they will totally disable, hamstring the horses of their enemies.

בסדם אל תבא נפשי O MY SOUL, COME NOT THOU INTO THEIR SECRET DELIBERATION (סוד may have the sense of plot) — this has reference to the story of Zimri, (Numbers 25:6-15) when the tribe of Simeon assembled and brought the Midianitish woman before Moses, saying, “Is this woman forbidden or permitted to be taken as a wife? If you say she is forbidden, who made the daughter of Jethro permissible to you in marriage” (See Sanhedrin 82b) — let not my name be mentioned in connection with that event! Indeed, it is said (Numbers 25:14) “Zimri, the son of Zalu, a prince of a father’s house among the Simeonites” — but Scripture does not state “a son of Jacob”.

בקהלם UNTO THEIR ASSEMBLY — when Korah of the tribe of Levi will assemble the entire congregation against Moses and Aaron —

אל תחד כבודי MY GLORY BE NOT THOU UNITED — let my name not be associated there with them! (Genesis Rabbah 98:5) And so it was, for it is said (Numbers 16:1) “Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath. the son of Levi” — but it does not say “the son of Jacob”. In Chronicles, however, (1 Chronicles 6:22,23), where the genealogy of Korah is traced in connection with the “Duchan” (properly, the platform — the place on which the Levites were stationed for the service of song in the Temple) it is said, “the son of Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, the son of Israel (Genesis Rabbah 98:5).

אל תחד כבדי MY GLORY BE NOT THOU UNITED — כבוד is masculine and therefore you must needs explain the phrase as though he were addressing himself to “the glory” saying, “thou, my glory, be not united with them!” תחד is exactly the same grammatical form (2nd masc. sing. and not 3rd fem. sing.) as (Isaiah 14:20) “Thou shall not be united (אל תחד) with them in burial”

כי באפם הרגו איש FOR IN THEIR WRATH THEY SLEW A MAN — This refers to Hamor and the people of Shechem, and they are spoken of as איש “one” man because they were all regarded as of no more account than one man when it was a matter of attacking them. It likewise states in the history of Gideon, (Judges 6:16) “And thou shalt smite the Midianites as one man”, and similarly concerning Egypt, (Exodus 15:1) “The horse (singular) and its rider (singular) hath he thrown into the sea” (i.e. the whole army as though it consisted of but one horse and its rider). This is a Midrashic interpretation (Genesis Rabbah 99:6). The plain meaning of the use of the singular form is: a group of men is called “a man” having in mind each one separately, so that the meaning is: they slew every man with whom they were angry. Similar is (Ezekiel 19:3) “and he learned to catch the prey, he devoured (אדם) a man” (which is the same as בני אדם “men”)

וברצונם עקרו שור AND IN THEIR SELFWILL THEY LAMED AN OX — they desired to exterminate Joseph who is called שור, as it is said, (Deuteronomy 33:17) “His firstling bullock (שורו) (Joseph), majesty is his”. עקרו means in old French essarter. It has the same meaning as in (Joshua 11:6) “Thou shalt hamstring (תעקר) their horses”.

סוד, verwandt mit: זוד still im Innern etwas "kochen", auf etwas im Stillen, aber heiß sinnen, und mit: צוד das Ersonnene künstlich zu erlangen streben. In der Mitte steht סור die Mitteilung dessen, was man still ersonnen: die gemeinsame Beratung. קהל: die Versammlung zur Ausführung. Also: Gesinnung und Geist hätten Schimeon und Lewi wohl zur Führerschaft, allein ihre Mittel und Wege sind die verwerflichen, darum: darf in ihren Rat mein Wille, (der Wille meiner Nation) nicht kommen, d. h. in ihrem Rat darf nicht der Nationalwille beschlossen werden, ihr Rat nie als Repräsentant des Nationalwillens erscheinen: "in ihrer Versammlung nie meine Ehre mit angeschlossen sein" (תחד von יחד), von dem, was sie tun, nie die Nationalehre berührt werden; wenn sie "raten", darf nie mein Wille, und wenn sie "taten" nie meine Ehre aufs Spiel kommen; denn באפם הרגו איש: ihr אף, ihr Zorn war ein an sich vollkommen gerechter, allein sie haben in ihrem Zorn "Mord" geübt, haben in ihrem Zorn unschuldige Menschen erschlagen — hätten sie sich lediglich an dem "großen Junker" vergriffen, Jakob hätte sie schwerlich so hart getadelt. —

וברצונם עקרו שור. Was dies heißt, ist mehr als zweifelhaft . שור heißt ent schieden: Ochse, עַקֵר entschieden: lähmen, die Fußsehne durchschneiden. רצון heißt jedoch ohnehin überwiegend nur ein freundliches Wohlwollen, und da es nicht כרצונס (wie Nehemias 9, 24 u. 37 und Esther 9, 5) heißt, sondern ברצונם, so dürfte es wohl schwerlich hier Willkür, sondern ebenfalls Freundlichkeit bedeuten. Es dürfte daher ähnlich wie מכרתיהם ihre List bezeichnen, in welcher sie Freundlichkeit erheuchelten, שור aber, wie ׳בכור שורו הדר לו וגו, die Kraft bedeuten, die, an sich friedlich, dennoch sich im Kampfe bewährt, und wäre sodann der Sinn: "denn in ihrem Zorn haben sie Mord an Menschen begangen, und hatten schon zuvor deren sonst friedliche, aber wenn angegriffen, sich tapfer wehrende Kraft durch ihre Freundlichkeit gelähmt", hatten durch freundliches Zureden zur מילה die Kraft gelähmt, überfielen sie dann, als sie schwach waren, und so war es nicht einmal eine Heldentat! Darum

Who permitted you to marry Yisro’s daughter? You might ask: Why was Moshe in fact permitted to marry a Midianite woman? The answer is: Tzipporah was a proselyte. Another answer: Moshe married her before the Torah was given.

When the lineage of Korach is recorded concerning the “platform,” it is said... It seems Rashi cites this so we will not ask: How does Rashi know that the verse means this? Perhaps the Torah omitted Yaakov from the episodes of Zimri and Korach because it is Scripture’s way to trace lineage back to the Twelve Tribes, but not further. Therefore Rashi cites this verse where the lineage is traced back to Yaakov. If so, why in [Parshas] Korach did the lineage go back only to Leivi? The verses seem to conflict. Perforce, it is because Yaakov had requested that he not be mentioned in the lineage there. This seems to be an answer to Re’m, who asked the question: why is Yaakov’s name mentioned in Divrei Hayamim contrary to the manner in which it is mentioned in Scripture? Re’m also asks: Nowhere is Yaakov’s name mentioned in Scripture in connection with Zimri. If so, why did we not say that Scripture fails to say זמרי בן סלוא נשיא בית אב לשמעוני בן יעקב simply because heads of families are traced back to the Twelve Tribes, not further? It seems the answer is: We see that the reason Korach’s lineage is not traced back to Yaakov is due to Yaakov’s prayer, as I wrote, for otherwise the verses would conflict. If so, with Zimri too it was due to Yaakov’s prayer. For the verse mentions the two together: “My soul will not enter their secret council (Zimri), [let my honor not be identified with their assembly (Korach)].”

The word כבוד is masculine... [Rashi is saying] that the conjugation for the masculine second person is the same as for the feminine third person, as it is here. Therefore תחד could be either feminine third person or masculine second person.

They wished to exterminate Yoseif... [Rashi is explaining: The verse does] not mean they actually exterminated him, for Yoseif ruled. Rather, they are so called because their intent was to exterminate him, as in (Devarim 26:5): “The Aramaean who destroyed my forefather,” [referring to Lavan who sought to destroy Yaakov, but did not actually destroy him].

My self shall not come in their company [ sodam ] . 16 Alternatively, this is referring to their secret [ sod ] actions. With their assembly may my glory not be associated; for in their anger they killed men, the inhabitants of Shekhem, and with their will they hamstrung oxen, they cut the legs of the oxen of those inhabitants, so that they no longer would be usable.

בסודם, “to their counsel,” a reference to the deceitful answer they gave to Shechem and Chamor in the matter of Dinah’s rape and how to compensate for this.

ובקהלם, “and in their congregation, etc.” a reference to the plot to kill the male inhabitants of Shechem.

כי באפם הרגו איש, “for in their anger they killed a man.” A reference to the inhabitants of Shechem.

וברצונם עקרו שור, “and it was their wish to uproot an ox.” Onkelos translates the word שור as סנאה, “the hated one.” It is similar to the word שור in Genesis 49,22 where it means “wall.” After they had killed the inhabitants of Shechem they climbed its protective wall. An alternate explanation understands שור as an allusion to חמור, Chamor and Schechem, the leaders of the town of Shechem. The ox is considered the largest of the domesticated animals, as we know of the description פרות הבשן, Amos 4,1, where the prophet describes the people oppressing the poor in such terms. It is also possible that the word איש describes all the people killed in Shechem, and that after having killed the males they plundered their belongings, and that Yaakov describes that with the words עקרו שור, “they uprooted all their belongings, their valuables.”

“Let not my person be included in their council” [49:6]. Jacob said to Simeon and Levi. With your advice, Zimri gathered the tribe of Simeon and took a gentile Midianite woman before Moses and said. Is she permitted to me to sleep with her or is she forbidden? If you, Moses, want to tell us that she is forbidden, how did you take the daughter of Jethro who was also a gentile? Therefore, Jacob said: On that incident, my name, Jacob, should not be mentioned. By the war of Korah, who was from the tribe of Levi, there too my name, Jacob, should not be mentioned. Because Simeon and Levi killed Shechem and Hamor and wanted to kill Joseph, therefore, my name should not be mentioned in connection with their deeds. (Rashi, Genesis, 49:6.)

(1) There is no firm evidence that the city of Shechem mentioned in the books of the prophets is identical with the town near which Dinah was raped. There are pointers that suggest that this was not the same city. If the brothers were tending sheep at Shechem while their homes were at Chevron, Shechem must be presumed to have been less than a day's walk away. It is unreasonable to assume that Jacob sent Joseph all by himself on a journey of several days, as would have been the case if Shechem mentioned there were identical with the Nablus of today. In particular, seeing that so much bloodshed had taken place there, it would have been irresponsible to send a seventeen-year old into such hostile country all by himself. Even the brothers themselves were hardly likely to provoke the local population by grazing their flocks in their vicinity. We must assume therefore that Ir Shechem means the city of Shechem in the same sense as Ir David means "the capital of David's kingdom." The author explains how to dispose of apparently contradictory comments by the Talmud in Sanhedrin 102. (2) The reference to Dinah being a daughter of Leah is undoubtedly complimentary. The Torah, by referring to her ancestry, emphasizes that she had nothing but the best of intentions, that her excursion did not indicate a departure from traditional Jewish conduct. The repetition of the three expressions "He took her, he lay with her, he forced her" indicate that she remained uncooperative during all three phases of what is being described; she did not weaken in her resistance in any way. The reason three actions are mentioned is because Jacob's family suffered three indignities: A) The shame suffered by the whole family; B) The damage done to the girl's innocence and the loss of her virginity; C) The physical pain caused Dinah when she had to submit to violence. The punishment for the first of these indignities prescribed by the Torah is boshet, compensation in financial terms. The second indignity which reduced Dinah's value as a prospective bride in the compensation for the victim. It is noteworthy that Dinah did not lose her appeal for Shechem on account of any of the indignities he had heaped upon her. "He cleaved to the daughter of Jacob" (34,3). The family of Jacob had not become sullied in his eyes; he loved her just as before (not like Amnon who lost all his desire for Tamar once he had raped her). Shechem tried to talk softly to Dinah's heart to help her recover from her pain. (3) The order in which the Torah describes the arrival of the sons, after Chamor had already arrived at Jacob's house, is to exonerate Jacob from any implication in his sons' subsequent actions, since there had not been an opportunity for them to consult. That is why Jacob on his deathbed refers to "in their secret counsel let my soul not be involved" (Genesis 49,6). It is to underscore that he had not been a party to their plan. Obviously, the sons could not have heard about the event while being in the field. Therefore, we must understand the sequence of events thus: (34,7) "When the sons came home and heard what a shameful act had been perpetrated against Israel, namely that a daughter of Jacob had been slept with, something that could not be tolerated." (4) Chamor uses the future course of events in order to compensate for an injustice that could no longer be undone. He emphasizes that he does not only want to legitimize his relations with Dinah, but goes far beyond this, and this constitutes a great honor for Jacob. The king offers the freedom of the country to Jacob's family. The sons' reason for deceiving Chamor has already been discussed in the first part of this chapter. (5) When the brothers use the term tame, defiled, when referring to the rape and subsequently suggesting a compromise, they are already using deceit, since they conveyed the impression to Chamor and Shechem that they had calmed down already and that their suggestions therefore could be taken at face value, could be believed. An exact examination of the text reveals that in fact the brothers did not breach any contract, nor did they retract from their original position. This is the reason Onkelos translates the word mirmah, slyness, deceit, simply as chochmah, cleverness, wisdom. They said, "We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to a man with a foreskin because it is a shame for us to forgive such an act." Chamor understood them to mean that the words "we cannot" refer only to the foreskin, not to the shame they had suffered. Similarly, Chamor understood their statement "if you will become like us," as referring only to the rite of circumcision, whereas the brothers used it in a wider sense meaning that they would have to embrace all aspects of the brothers' lifestyle and religion. Thereby they served notice that they were not going to forgive anything. We note that nowhere did the brothers promise that Dinah would become Shechem's wife. They only spoke in general terms, "our daughters," "your daughters," etc., and threatened to leave the neighborhood with their sister if their demands were not complied with. When Chamor reported in his city on these discussions, he represented the rape episode as having been resolved, and emphasized the future advantages to be gained by intermarrying with Jacob's family. The unexpected acceptance by the townspeople of the terms offered may have convinced the sons of Jacob that heaven had indicated its approval for their plan of revenge. (6) Possibly the "third day" referred to was the third day of the week, i.e. Tuesday, but in reality the first day after the circumcision. This day is under the constellation of Mars, and signals bloodshed. (7) The brothers had to prevent the wives and children from raising an alarm in the neighboring towns after they had killed the males. Therefore, the females and children had to be taken captive. Since abandoning the herds made no sense, and since their undertaking had evidently enjoyed the help of heaven, they felt entitled to acquire the livestock etc. The repeated outcry "May our sister be treated like a harlot?" underscores that to revenge such a misdeed, considerations of personal safety that are normally valid criteria, and which were part of the objections raised by Jacob, were not valid now. (8) Until now Jacob had not been certain that his dream about the ladder had been of a prophetic nature; he only became sure now that G-d spoke to him and identified Himself as having been the One to whom Jacob had made the vow at that time. (9) He was intent to remove any trace of idols that had been part of the loot his sons had taken from the city of Shechem and Chamor, and to remove any impurity acquired through contact with such idols. To this end, he instructed all his people to change their garments. Of course, the exhortation included the order to desist from any idolatrous practices that might have been picked up by his sons due to their contact with the idol worshippers. (12) The death of Deborah, a fine woman, may have been the final chapter in the sons' repentance of the whole Dinah episode, since we have a tradition that the death of righteous people provides atonement for the survivors. Inasmuch as all of Jacob's sons could qualify for the heritage promised to their forefathers, G-d repeats "to your descendants I will give the land," meaning to all of them, not like Esau or Ishmael who did not qualify though they too had been descendants of Isaac and Abraham respectively. (10) Contrary to the normal custom of a pupil departing from his master, in this case G-d departed from Jacob, the latter still remaining in his place. This suggests that Jacob's task had not yet been completed, prompting him to erect the monument and fulfil payment of his vow. It was here that the betrothal of Israel and G-d took place, later to be consummated by chuppah, a wedding ceremony at Mount Sinai. Details of this whole process will be discussed in Chapter forty-eight. (11) At the beginning of Rachel's labor, the midwife encouraged her saying, "Do not worry, this too will be a son for you." This gave rise to Rachel naming the child before she had even seen it. (13) It seems that Jacob had not been home at the time Reuben had rearranged the furnishings in Bilhah's bedroom. Reuben would not have dared to do this otherwise. The statement that the sons of Jacob were twelve may indicate that at that juncture Reuben lost his status as the firstborn, no longer counting as two (since the firstborn normally receives a double portion of the father's estate). More likely however, the Torah may stress that Reuben remained a full member of the Jewish people.

The ten rulers referred to are the ten brothers of Joseph, since it is written, "Ten of the brothers went down." They could have laid Egypt waste with their strength, but Joseph vanquished them with his wisdom. Since man is forced to sojourn on this earth although he has been provided with a soul by G-d, it is fitting that his fate be similar to the fate of other strangers in this world. Due to the soul's celestial antecedents, plus the fact that man was created in G-d’s image, his place should not really be down here on earth, but his natural habitat should be near the Almighty Himself. This is what David says in Psalms 119,19, "Do not hide Your commandments from me, because I am a stranger on this earth." It is natural for man to keep his intimate secrets from those whom he considers of inferior status. David pleads with G-d in Psalm 55,14 not to keep His secrets from him, because he is aware that his place of abode is so inferior. Also in Psalms 39,13, he pleads that though he may have become estranged from G-d through some of his deeds, G-d should not turn away from his supplication, since at least his ancestry is so superior. The reason that ordinary man, i.e. the one who does not constantly advance towards moral and spiritual perfection, is called am ha-aretz, people of the earth, is precisely because he has made the "lower" world his permanent home instead of treating it like the foyer to a far superior world (Avot 4,21). This world is reserved for those who preserve the Divine image in which they were created. Because our world is merely a foyer to the ultimate palace reserved for us, it is only natural that during our stay on this earth we must submit to the indignities usually reserved for aliens everywhere. The two major areas in which aliens are disadvantaged while far from home are A) They cannot claim the respect due them as they would in their native society, and B) they have to perform work unbefitting the dignity of their real status in order to earn their livelihood. Jeremiah already compares G-d as not insisting on the respect due Him, since He is in exile when His people are in exile (Jeremiah 14,8). "Why should You be a stranger on earth, like a guest requiring lodging, when Your name is proclaimed with us?" The meaning there is "Since You are not a stranger, and since You have existed from time immemorial, if You do not help us as our Savior, You will be considered like a man without recourse, like a disabled hero." This too is the line Moses took when he argued that people will comment on the demise of the Jewish people as evidence of the inability of G-d to overcome the Canaanites (Numbers 14,13-17). When our sages advise a person who is unable to master his passions to go to a place where he is unknown (Chagigah 16), they want to prevent the sin to be committed to fall into the category of chilul hashem, desecration of the holy name of G-d, something that it is impossible to atone for in this life. When a stranger is observed committing a sin, this does not influence the society of the place in which the sin is committed, since nobody pays the stranger any heed anyways. If the same sin were committed in one's hometown, others may use it as an excuse to do likewise, and the chilul hashem is beyond recall. The second major indignity suffered by strangers is their inability to converse in the language of that country, thereby making themselves laughingstocks and misfits in the new society they find themselves in. Even if in order to earn some money one subjects oneself to such indignities by becoming a stranger in a foreign land, since one has no guarantee that one will return home with a sizable fortune, what guarantee is there that even if the money has been earned, it will endure (see example of Rabbi Eleazar ben Charsum in Yuma 35)? Forsaking preoccupation with the acquisition of permanent wealth, namely Torah knowledge, cannot be justified. Our purpose in this world is to prepare ourselves for the world to come. It follows that those who demean themselves by unnecessary preoccupation with the acquisition of material wealth, demean the "palace" in favor of the "foyer." When the Midrash comments on the words Vayeshev Yaakov, that if a person of the caliber of Jacob wanted to live serenely on this earth, Satan interfered, the meaning is quite plain. A tzaddik who demonstrates too much interest in material wealth and pleasure in this world imperils his standing as a tzaddik and invites yissurim, painful tribulations, to remind him of the error of his ways. This is what the Midrash meant when it says one cannot demand the "goodies" of both worlds. "Peace" is real only in the other world, as indicated by the promise to Abraham, "And you will join your fathers in peace" (Genesis 15,15). The yissurim, afflictions, make its recipient realize that his presence on this earth is comparable to that of a persecuted stranger. Jacob's experiences are a perfect example of this analysis. The disappearance of Joseph, the rape of Dinah, the famine, the apparent loss of Shimon, the threatened loss of Benjamin, all combined to bring home that truth. Unless Jacob was a stranger on this earth whose rightful abode was in the celestial regions, how could we account for all the indignities he had to suffer? The second disadvantage we have mentioned as being suffered by aliens in a country not their own, the language problem, is also relevant when we view man's temporary stay on earth. As a rule, speech is used to articulate man's physical needs, i.e. food and drink etc., or to put it more crudely, to communicate those of his needs that he shares with the animal kingdom to others. Whenever mere language does not suffice to assure him of his needs, he resorts to violence, i.e. a call to arms: (Proverbs 18,6) "The lips of the fools engage in quarrels, his mouth calls for turbulence." Their very language becomes an instrument of violence. Jeremiah 18,18 illustrates this point further: "Let us smite him by means of language!" Wisdom, however, is superior to violence and to instruments of war and strife (Kohelet 9,16). When speech is employed to express the spiritual yearnings of man, it does not become an instrument of war or a means of animalistic gratification. When Solomon says, "Do not answer the fool according to his foolishness; answer the fool in accordance with his folly!" this means, "Do not use the power of speech to answer the fool on his own level, but use the power of speech so that even a fool can recognize his folly (Proverbs 26,5). The ox is the animal that uses its brute strength to work hard uncomplainingly. Joseph had to suffer many indignities in the early part of his life, such as the brothers' jealousy, the Midianite slave merchants, Potiphar's wife's accusations etc. Nevertheless, he proved his moral superiority in his encounter with his master's wife. This moral superiority which he demonstrated when it clearly hurt his chances of a continued career (when he refused the advances of his master's wife), was richly rewarded by G-d, who alone was aware of the pure motives which had governed Joseph's behavior throughout. Joseph's ability to control his carnal urges made him a paragon of virtue. The Talmud Shabbat 63 says that whoever fulfills one single mitzvah completely, wholeheartedly, will not receive evil tidings. He will not need to worry about receiving bad news, but can enjoy undisturbed confidence that G-d’s personal Providence will remain at his side. Joseph's strength, i.e. the ox's strength, lay in the certainty that his cause was righteous, not in his ability to pull heavy loads. The lion, on the other hand, represents mere physical prowess. The brothers, in being described as "rulers" are conceived as having made themselves at home here on earth, not being content with remaining aliens, the purpose of man's sojourn on this globe. For this reason, then, Joseph representing the inner strength of a man of spiritual values, was able to overcome the combined strength of his brothers who had threatened to destroy Egypt failing release of their brother Benjamin.

Moreover, the description of the creation of man being "in the image of G-d" clearly supports our view that man is the crowning glory of G-d’s handiwork, is of central significance. The statement in Kohelet 3,21 that the "spirit of man returns to the celestial regions" clearly shows that man is composed at least partially of something at least as close to G-d as the earliest disembodied intelligence He had created.

The third group of people, namely believing Jews, who while steadfast in their belief, would still welcome specific statements in the Torah concerning afterlife, need to appreciate the following. Afterlife is much more than a promise held out in return for specific religious observances. Man's superiority over other creatures on this earth could hardly be demonstrated by anything other than the survival of his soul. Solomon grapples with the problem in the book of Kohelet, and concludes that this is the only thing which makes man stand out over the animals. "Who perceives that the spirit of man is the one that ascends on high, while the spirit of the beast descends down into the earth?" (Kohelet 3, 21) David and many others do not tire of expressing their longing for the blissful state of afterlife. Abigail refers to it, the Talmud is full of references to it. When one reads the promise of reward in our Parshah, one finds at the end, after the mundane rewards have been listed, "I will place My Residence amongst you." For the believers this is enough. For the scoffers nothing would be enough, since they only believe what their own eyes have seen, anyways.

From all this it seems clear, that if the red heifer contaminates all that it comes in contact with, surely the heifer itself must be the source of the contamination! The whole matter seems to defy our normal way of reasoning. Therefore, the use of the words "this is the statute of the Torah", at the beginning of this paragraph is to remind us that logic cannot be employed if we want to comprehend the meaning of this commandment. This is why our sages quote the wisest of men, Solomon, as admitting that comprehension of this mitzvah, or rather its mechanics, its halachic rulings, escapes him. People who try to philosophise about Torah, fall into two categories. Group one believes that everything written in the Torah needs to be understood at face value, literally. For instance, if the Torah refers to G'd "smelling the sweet fragrance of a sacrifice," they perceive G'd literally employing His sense of smell. Or, if the Torah reports G'd as descending on Mount Sinai, they understand this to have been a physical descent. The second group is aware that statements in the Torah are subject to interpretation. Some members of this group will interpret on the basis that the Torah employs human idiom in order to facilitate our understanding of certain concepts. This group will not interpret in a manner that conflicts with known Torah principles. A sub group of category number two, arrogates to itself the right to make its interpretations primary and Torah principles only secondary. This is done by most Christian and a few Jewish philosophers. Making one's own intellect supreme in the matter of exegesis is heretical, of course. Solomon refers to all three groups in Proverbs 14, 14-16. (1) The fool will believe anything. (2) The crafty one will understand in line with his principles. (3) The haughty fool will come to grief through exaggerated self confidence. The manner in which the Torah portrays the laws of the red heifer is a clear hint not to try and unravel that which is conceptually beyond the human intellect. The contradictions have been built into this legislation to warn us off trying to comprehend it.

IT is well known that there are men whose face is like that of other animals thus the face of some person is like that of a lion, that of another person like that of an ox, and so on: and man’s face is described according as the form of his face resembles the form of the face of other animals. By the expressions, “the face of an ox,” “the face of a lion,” “the face of an eagle” (Ezek, 1:10), the prophet describes a human face inclining towards the forms of these various species. This interpretation can be supported by two proofs. First, the prophet says of the Ḥayyot in general that” their appearance is this, they have the form of man” (ver. 5), and then in describing each of the Ḥayyot he attributes to them the face of a man, that of an ox, that of a lion, and that of an eagle. Secondly, in the second description of the Chariot, which is intended as a supplement to the first, the prophet says, Each hath four faces; the one is the face of a cherub, the second a man’s face, the third a lion’s face, and the fourth that of an eagle (ibid. x. W. He thus clearly indicates that the terms “the face of an ox” and “the face of a cherub” are identical. But cherub designates “a youth.” By analogy we explain the two other terms—“the face of a lion” and “the face of an eagle” in the same manner. “The face of the ox” has been singled out on account of the etymology of the Hebrew term shor (ox), as has been indicated by me. It is impossible to assume that this second description refers to the perception of another prophetic vision, because it concludes thus: “This is the Ḥayyah which I saw at the river Chebar” (ibid. ver. 15). What we intended to explain is now clear.

“Koraḥ, son of Yitzhar son of Kehat son of Levi” – why is it not written: Son of Jacob or son of Israel? That is what the verse said: (When Jacob blessed his children.) “Let myself not come in their counsel” (Genesis 49:6) – these are the spies; “let my glory not be associated with their assembly” (Genesis 49:6) – this is Koraḥ. Jacob said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, neither regarding the spies, nor in Koraḥ’s dispute, let my name be mentioned with those wicked ones. When should my name be mentioned? When their lineage is recorded and they are standing upon the platform’ (They are performing the Levite service in the Temple.) – “son of Taḥat, son of Asir, son of Evyasaf, son of Koraḥ, son of Yitzhar, son of Kehat, son of Levi, son of Israel” (I Chronicles 6:22–23). “And Datan and Aviram” – from here they said: ‘Woe unto the wicked one, woe unto his neighbor,’ as Datan and Aviram were neighbors of Koraḥ, who was situated in the south, as it is written: “The families of the sons of Kehat shall encamp on the side of the Tabernacle to the south” (Numbers 3:29). The banner of Reuben was adjacent to them, as it is stated: “The banner of the camp of Reuben is to the south” (Numbers 2:10). But the banner of Judah was in the east, and Issachar and Zebulun were with him, as it is stated: “Those encamping at the front, to the east, are the banner of the camp of Judah” (Numbers 2:3). Moses and Aaron were adjacent to them, as it is written: “Those encamped in front of the Tabernacle, to the east, in front of the Tent of Meeting: Moses, Aaron, and his sons” (Numbers 3:38). Because they were adjacent to the Torah, they merited becoming masters of Torah, as it is written: “Judah, My lawgiver” (Psalms 60:9), and it is written: “From the children of Issachar, possessors of understanding of the times” (I Chronicles 12:33), and it is written: “From Zebulun, those who ply the scribe’s quill” (Judges 5:14). But Datan and Aviram, who were neighbors of a disputant, were stricken with him and were eliminated from the world.

“Simeon and Levi are brothers; weapons of villainy are their heritage” (Genesis 49:5) “Simeon and Levi are brothers” – brothers of Dina but not brothers of Joseph. “Weapons of villainy are their heritage [mekheroteihem]” – he said to them: These weapons in your possession have been stolen by you. For whom are they fitting? It is for mekheroteihem – for Esau, who sold [makhar] the birthright. “Let my soul not come in their company; with their assembly let my glory not be associated; for in their anger they killed men, and with their will they hamstrung oxen” (Genesis 49:6). “Let my soul not come in their company” – when they come to take counsel in Shitim. (When the Israelite men engaged in harlotry with the Midianite women, in Shitim, one of their leaders, who encouraged this practice, was the prince of the tribe of Simeon, Zimri son of Salu.) “With their assembly let my glory not be associated” – when they assemble against Moses in the congregation of Koraḥ. (In these instances, when the Torah identifies the perpetrators of these crimes, who descended from the tribes of Simeon and Levi, the verses do not mention that they are sons of Jacob. ) “With their assembly let my glory not be associated” – but for the platform, let my name be associated, when his descendants stand on the platform, (When the Levites stand on the platform to sing as part of the Temple service. ) as it is stated: “These are those who stood, and their sons, [from the sons of the Kehatites:] Heiman [the singer, son of Yoel, son of Samuel]” (I Chronicles 6:18). Rabbi Huna, Rabbi Ḥanina, and Rabbi Pinḥas: The three of them said: “Son of Yitzhar, son of Kehat, son of Levi, son of Israel” (I Chronicles 6:23). (In the verse regarding the congregation of Koraḥ, his lineage is traced only as far as Levi, but here the lineage is traced back to Jacob.) “For in their anger they killed men [ish]” (The Hebrew ish is in the singular.) – this is Ḥamor father of Shekhem. “Hamstrung [ikeru] oxen [shor]” – they undermined [akartun] the security wall [shuran] of proselytes. (As a result of the massacre following the circumcision of the residents of Shekhem, all proselytes will fear that perhaps the same will befall them after their circumcision.) Rabbi Ḥunya and Rabbi Yirmeya in the name of Rabbi Aḥiya bar Abba: As it is written: “And with their will they hamstrung [ikeru] oxen” – in order to fulfill the will of your inclination, you undermined [akartem] the security wall of proselytes. “Undermined a trough” – this is one of the matters that they emended for King Ptolemy. (The seventy-two elders assembled by King Ptolemy introduced several emendations into the translation of the Torah into Greek (see Megilla 9a). One of them was that instead of writing, “killed men…and hamstrung oxen,” they wrote, “killed oxen…and undermined troughs,” so Ptolemy would not deem them murderers.) “Cursed be their anger, as it is fierce, and their wrath, as it is harsh; I will divide them in Jacob, and I will disperse them in Israel” (Genesis 49:7). “Cursed be their anger, as it is fierce” – Rabbi Ḥunya and Rabbi Azarya in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: [Jacob] increased the number of hot-tempered bohaknin (These were individuals afflicted with bohak, a skin condition characterized by white blotches on the skin. When the blotches appeared on the face, this was considered a sign that the individual was hot-tempered. ) among them. That is what is said regarding one who is afflicted with bohak patches, that he is hot-tempered. Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: [This is analogous] to a king who had a son, and the king foresaw that a serpent was destined to bite his son. He said: May the serpent that seeks to bite my son be cursed. So, [Jacob] came to curse them, but he cursed their anger. “Cursed be their anger, as it is fierce, and their wrath [ve’evratam], as it is harsh” – and their transgression [vaaveratam], as it is harsh. (He did not curse them; rather, he cursed the anger and the transgression that was caused by that anger.) “I will divide them [aḥalkem] in Jacob” – this is the tribe of Levi: “I am your portion [ḥelkekha] and your inheritance” (Numbers 18:20). “And I will disperse them in Israel” – this is the tribe of Simeon. That is what is said: Most of the poor were from the tribe of Simeon. Rabbi Tanḥuma said: Although we explain and say: “And the cities that you shall give from the holding of the children of Israel, [from the greater you shall increase and from the lesser you shall decrease]” (Numbers 35:8), six cities, they and their open land, all of them were from Simeon. (The Torah states that forty-eight cities were to be given to the Levites (Numbers 35:7–8). Of these, nine were from the tribes of Judah and Simeon (Joshua 21:9-16). The midrash states that six of them were from Simeon and only three from Judah, despite the fact that Simeon was a small tribe and had only seventeen cities.) When they saw that he was rebuking them, (When the rest of Jacob’s sons saw that he had rebuked Reuben, Simeon, and Levi.) they began departing to the corners. When he saw that they were departing to the corners, he began calling each and every one.

“Simeon and Levi are brothers; weapons of villainy are their heritage” (Genesis 49:5). Reuben went out and his ears were slumped. [Jacob] began calling: “Simeon and Levi are brothers” – brothers for degradation. He said to them: ‘You were brothers for Dina, as it is written: “Two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dina’s brothers, each took his sword” (Genesis 34:25), but not brothers for Joseph, as you sold him.’ Rabbi Simlai said: In Reuben’s regard it is written: “In order to deliver him from their hand, to restore him to his father” (Genesis 37:22). Reuben was not involved in Joseph’s sale. Judah, too, said to them: “What profit [is there if we kill our brother]?” (Genesis 37:26). These were the eldest; consequently, the two of them sold him. (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah were the oldest sons of Jacob. If Reuben and Judah were not involved in the sale, it must have been Simeon and Levi who organized it. ) Know that it is so, for when they descended to Egypt, [Joseph] took from them none other than Simeon, as it is stated: “He took Simeon from them [and incarcerated him before their eyes]” (Genesis 42:24). That is why [Jacob] called the two of them as one. “Weapons of villainy” – what are weapons of villainy? He said to them: ‘They have been stolen by you; they are not yours. They belong to Esau, in whose regard it is written: “By your sword you shall live”’ (Genesis 27:40). Those are weapons of villainy, and villainy is none other than Esau, as it is stated: “For the villainy to your brother Jacob” (Obadiah 1:10). (Thus, Jacob was saying that the weapons of Simeon and Levi belong to Esau, who is the subject of the verse in Obadiah. ) “Their heritage [mekheroteihem]” – Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is a Greek expression, makhirin, makhirin>. Some say: “Mekhuroteihen” – their residences [meguroteihem], just as it says: “Your origins [mekhorotayikh] and your birthplace” (Ezekiel 16:3). “Let my soul not come in their company; with their assembly let my glory not be associated; for in their anger they killed men, and with their will they hamstrung oxen” (Genesis 49:6). “Let my soul not come in their company” – when Zimri will arise and perform that act with Kozbi, let my name not be mentioned there, as it is stated: “The name of the man of Israel who was slain…[Zimri, son of Salu, a prince of a patrilineal house of the Simeonites]” (Numbers 25:14). (The name of Jacob is not mentioned. ) “With their assembly let my glory not be associated” – when Koraḥ will assemble his congregation to dispute, let my name not be associated with them, but rather, “Koraḥ, son of Yitzhar, son of Kehat, son of Levi” (Numbers 16:1), but it did not say: “Son of Jacob.” “For in their anger they killed men [ish]” – did they kill one man [ish]; is it not written: “They killed all the males” (Genesis 34:25)? It is that they were all considered before the Holy One blessed be He like one man. Likewise it says: “Behold [hen], nations may be regarded like a drop from a bucket…” (Isaiah 40:16). What is hen? In the Greek language, hen is one. Likewise it says: “You will smite Midian as one man” (Judges 6:16). Similarly, “the horse and its rider He cast into the sea” (Exodus 15:1) – like one horse and its rider. (The singular terms are used in order to indicate that God cast all the many horses and riders of the Egyptian army into the sea as though they were just one. ) “Cursed is their anger, as it is fierce, and their wrath, as it is harsh; I will divide them in Jacob, and I will disperse them in Israel” (Genesis 49:7). “Cursed is their anger” – he cursed only their anger. Likewise, the wicked Bilam says: “How will I curse, where God has not cursed” (Numbers 23:8)? If at a time of anger he cursed only their anger, can I come to curse them? (If Jacob was angry at Simeon and Levi and yet, with divine spirit, Jacob cursed only their anger and not them, can I, Bilam, curse the Israelites? ) “I will divide them in Jacob” – how so? Twenty-four thousand fell from the tribe of Simeon in [the incident of] Zimri, and its widows were twenty-four thousand. They were divided into two thousand for each and every tribe, as it is stated: “I will divide them in Jacob.” Everyone who circulates among the doorways [to beg] is from the tribe of Simeon. The Holy One blessed be He said: Levi too will circulate. What did the Holy One blessed be He do? He provided him with his sustenance cleanly, and yet Jacob’s edict was fulfilled. The Holy One blessed be He elevated [Levi] and gave him one-tenth, (The first tithe of produce. ) and he circulates and says: ‘Give me my portion.’ That is why it is stated: “I will divide them in Jacob.”

Spies … and the congregation of Korah, etc. (Fol. 109, b) Our Rabbis were taught: The congregation of Korah has no share in the world to come, as it is said (Num. 16) And the earth covered them — in this world, and they disappeared from the midst of the congregation, — in the world to come. So says R. Akiba. R. Juda b. Bathyra says: "They are as a lost thing for which the loser inquires, as it is said (Ps. 119, 176) I have gone erringly astray, like a lost sheep; seek thy servant, for thy commandments have I not forgotten." (Num. 16, 1) And Korah took (vayikach). Resh Lakish said: "He bought a very bad purchase for himself." Korah, i.e., he has made Israel bald-headed; ben Yizhar, i.e., he who made the world hot as in the middle of the day. Ben Kehath, i.e., he who made blunt the teeth of his parents; ben Levi, i.e., he who became a companion to the Gehenna. But why is not also written ben Jacob? R. Samuel b. Isaac said: "Jacob's prayer (Gen. 49, 6) Unto their secret shall my soul not come, refers to the spies; unto their assembly my glory shall not be united, refers to the cougregation of Korah." Dathan and Abiram; i.e., Dathan means who disregarded the law of God; Abiram, who hardened his heart not to repent. On, who sat in the mourning [repented upon his sin and withdrew from Korah]. Peleth, for whom wonders were made; ben Reuben, who [carefuly] observed it and understood [that it was wrong]. Rab said: "On ben Peleth was saved by his wife [from being among the congregation of Korah]. She said to him: 'What is the difference to you? If Moses will be master, you are only a disciple, and you will be in the same position if Korah will be the master.' And to his answer: 'What shall I do, I was with them in consultation, and swore to take part with them?' she said, 'I know that the whole congregation is holy, as it is written (Num. 16, 3) For the whole of the congregation are all of them holy, remain in your house and I will save thee.' She made him drink wine to intoxication, and she made him sleep in the house, and she herself sat outside at the entrance of the house, (Fol. 110) uncovered her head, loosened her hair, and whoever came to his house, to call upon On, when he saw the uncovered head of the woman, returned. Meantime, the congregation was swallowed. On the other hand, the wife of Korah said to him: 'See what Moses did. He proclaimed himself as a king, his brother he made highpriest, the sons of his brother for adjuncts of the high-priests. Heave-offering he commanded to give to the priests, and even from tithes, which are for the Levites, he commands to give again one-tenth to the priest. And not only this, he made of you fools by commanding all the Levites to shave off all their hair, so that you should look like prisoners.' And to his answer: 'He himself also did so,' she said, 'Since all the glory belongs to him, he does not care, etc.' And this is meant by the passage (Pr. 14, 1) The wise among women buildeth her house, — referring to the wife of On ben Peleth. But the foolish pulleth it down with her own hands, — referring to the wife of Korah."

"And the habitation of the children of Israel in Egypt and in other lands was four hundred and thirty years." This is one of the verses that they (the seventy-two elders changed) in transcribing (the Torah) for King Ptolemy, viz. (Megillah 9a): Once King Ptolemy assembled seventy-two elders and placed each in a separate house (without telling them why he was doing so), and he said to each of them: "Transcribe for me [into Greek] the Torah of Moses your teacher." The Holy One Blessed be He placed goodly counsel in the heart of each, and they all wrote as one (Genesis 1:1): "G–d created in the beginning" [so that Ptolemy could not structure the words as: "In the beginning, god was created."] [They wrote] (Ibid. 1:26): "I will make a man in image and form" [and not, literally: "Let us make a man, etc.", so that he would not be able to argue for a plurality of gods]. [They wrote] (Ibid. 2:2): "And He finished on the sixth day, and He rested on the seventh day" [and not, literally: "And G–d finished His work on the seventh day," so that he could not argue that G–d worked on the seventh day]. [They wrote] (Ibid. 5:2): "Male and female He created him" [and not, literally: "Male and female He created them" (which Ptolemy could use as an argument for the creation of two separate bodies)]. [They wrote] (Ibid. 11:7): "Let Me go down and confound their tongue" [and not, literally: "Let us go down", so that he would not find support for his polytheistic views]. [They wrote] (Ibid. 18:12): "And Sarah laughed bikrovehah" ["among her neighbors", and not, literally: "bekirbah" ("within her"), so that Ptolemy would not question why Sarah should be punished for laughing, and not Abraham, if they both laughed inwardly]. [They wrote] (Ibid. 49:7): "For in their wrath they killed an ox" [instead of: "a man" (so as not to give Ptolemy a pretext to call Jews murderers)], "and in their willfulness they razed a manger" [instead of: "an ox"]. [They wrote] (Exodus 4:20): "And Moses took his wife and his sons and he rode them on the bearer of men" [instead of "on the ass" (so that he not say that Moses lacked a horse or a camel)]. [They wrote] (Ibid. 12:40): "And the sojourning of the Jews, their dwelling in Egypt and in other lands was four hundred years." [(and not just: "their dwelling in Egypt," as per the verse, which would be open to dispute by Ptolemy's reckoning)]. [They wrote] (Ibid. 24:5): "And he sent the dignitaries of the children of Israel" [lest "youths" be taken demeaningly]; (Ibid. 11): "And to the dignitaries of the children of Israel, He did not stretch forth His hand." [They wrote] (Numbers 16:15): "Not one desirable object of theirs" [(instead of, literally: "Not one ass of theirs")] have I taken" [thus preventing Ptolemy from contending that it was only an ass that Moses had not taken]. [They wrote] (Deuteronomy 4:19): ["all the host of heaven …] which the L–rd your G–d bequeathed for illumination to all the peoples under the heavens" [and not, as in the verse: "which the L–rd your G–d bequeathed to all the peoples under the heavens," thus preventing him from construing this verse as a license for idolatry]. [They wrote] (Ibid. 17:3): "and he go and serve other gods … which I did not command to serve" [instead of, as per the verse: "which I did not command", lest he misconstrue it as: "which I did not command to exist" (and which "forced themselves" into creation against My will)]. And instead of (Leviticus 11:6): "And the arneveth (hare) […it is unclean to you"], they wrote: "the slender-legged"; for Ptolemy's wife was called "Arneveth", and Ptolemy would [otherwise] say: "The Jews have poked fun at me and put my wife's name in the Torah!" (Megillah 9a)

[9] "If they say, 'Come with us, let us lie in wait for blood; let us lurk secretly for the innocent without cause'" - These are the brothers of Joseph, who were lurking and saying, 'When will the end come, and we will kill him?' And when he came to them, they began to say to one another, 'This is the hour; this is the season,' and the Divine Presence (Shechinah) was jesting and saying, 'Woe to them for the blood of this righteous one.' Therefore, it is said, "We will lurk secretly for the innocent without cause." And of them all, none wanted to save him except Reuben, as it is said, "Reuben heard, and he saved him from their hand." He said to them, 'Come, and I will give you advice,' They said to him, 'What advice are you giving us?' He said to them, 'Let us throw him into the pit while he is alive, and our hand will not be upon him,' From where [do we learn this]? As it is stated: (Proverbs 1:12): "We will swallow them up alive as the grave, and whole, as those that go down into the pit" - that he went down to the pit in his innocence, and he did not know what they were going to do to him. Rabbi Levi ben Zavdai said: "Who lowered [Joseph] into the pit from among all his brothers? You must say it was Simeon and Levi, as it is said (Genesis 49:6), 'Into their council let my soul not enter.' But Reuben intended to save him and return him to his father, as it is said (Genesis 37:22), 'That he might save him from their hand, to restore him to his father.' (Genesis 37:29): 'And Reuben returned to the pit' - where was he? Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Nehemiah [disagreed]: Rabbi Judah said, 'The burden of the household was thrust upon him, and as soon as he was free from his burden, he came and looked into the pit and did not find him. This is the meaning of "And Reuben returned to the pit, and behold, Joseph was not in the pit, and he tore his clothes."' Rabbi Nehemiah said, 'He was occupied in his sackcloth and fasting over the incident that occurred, and he did not turn [from it], and as soon as he was free from his sackcloth and fasting, he came and looked into the pit and did not find him, as it says "And Reuben returned to the pit, etc." ' Not only that, but once they sold him, the Divine Presence (Shechinah) mocked them and said to them (Isaiah 55:8), 'For my thoughts are not your thoughts, etc.,' not with the thought that you think, 'nor your ways my ways,' and not in the way that you say, for if there were not a decree from before Me, your counsel would be nothing. (Proverbs 1:13): 'All precious substance shall we find, our houses shall be filled with spoil' - this is the sale of Joseph, who was a precious son to his father, as it is said (Genesis 37:3), 'For he was the son of his old age,' he was found to sustain them, as it is written (Genesis 45:5), 'For God sent me before you to preserve life.' 'Our houses shall be filled with spoil' - that they filled their houses with silver and gold from Joseph's treasures. Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said: The ten martyrs were drawn [to their deaths] only by the sin of selling Joseph. Rabbi Avin said: You must say that ten were exacted from every generation, and still, that sin persists. (Proverbs 1:14): 'Your lot shall be cast among us' - when Joseph sat down, he took the key and was calling out: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun - they are sons of one mother, let them come and sit; Dan and Naphtali - they are sons of one mother, let them come and sit; Gad and Asher - they are sons of one mother, let them come and sit; and he went back and hit with the key and said: Benjamin is an orphan, and I am an orphan, it is fitting for an orphan to sit with an orphan, 'One purse shall be ours' - for they all ate at one table at the banquet. How did he do it? He gave each one one portion, and to Benjamin five portions, how? He took his portion, and Benjamin's portion, and Ephraim's portion, and Manasseh's portion, and the portion of Asenath, Joseph's wife, and gave it to Benjamin, as it is said (Genesis 43:34): 'And he took and sent portions to them from before him, but Benjamin's portion was five times as much as any of theirs, and they drank and were merry with him.' Rabbi Shmuelai said in the name of Rabbi Isaac from Magdala: From the day that Joseph separated from his brothers he did not taste the taste of wine until that day, as it is written (Genesis 49:26), 'And the crown of the head of his brothers' Nazirite.' Rabbi Yosei bar Hanina said: They also did not taste the taste of wine, as it is said, 'And they drank and were merry with him.' Another explanation, 'Your lot shall be cast among us' - this is the Torah, which was the lot of the Holy One, Blessed be He, and given to Israel; 'One purse shall be ours' - at the time when they stood at Mount Sinai and said (Exodus 24:7), 'All that the Lord has spoken we will do and we will hear.'"

(Numb. 16:1:) NOW KORAH BEN IZHAR BEN KOHATH BEN LEVI BETOOK HIMSELF. But there is not written "ben Jacob" "ben Israel." (Tanh., Numb.5:4; Numb.R. 18:5; cf.Gen.R. 98:5.) This text is related (to Gen. 49:6): LET NOT MY SOUL COME INTO THEIR COUNCIL, i.e., that of the spies. (Ibid., cont.:) AND LET NOT MY GLORY BE JOINED WITH THEIR CONGREGATION, i.e., that of Korah. Jacob said to the Holy One: Sovereign of the World, with reference to the spies and with reference to the dissension of Korah, let not my name be mentioned [in connection with] those evil men, who are going to cause provocation. So when should my name (Israel) be joined ? When they are joined together to stand on the dais (as Levitical singers). (I Chron. 6:16, 22–23 [31, 37–38]:) BEN ASSIR BEN EBIASAPH BEN KORAH BEN IZHAR BEN KOHATH BEN LEVI BEN ISRAEL.

(Gen. 49:6) "For in their anger they slew a bull, and in their delight they uprooted a manger." (Against both the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint, the emendation clears Simeon and Levi of homicide.)

(Gen. 49:6:) LET NOT MY SOUL COME INTO THEIR COUNCIL, AND LET NOT MY GLORY BE JOINED WITH THEIR ASSEMBLY. When these two tribes (of Simeon and Levi) are assembled, let not my name be mentioned there. When Zimri arises and sins, LET NOT MY GLORY BE JOINED < with them >, (Probably the first part of the verse should have been cited here, as in Tanh., Gen. 12:10; Gen. R. 99 (another version):7 (= p. 1278 in the Theodor-Albeck edition).) [since it is stated (in Numb. 25:14): ZIMRI BEN SALU, PRINCE OF A CLAN BELONGING TO THE SIMEONITES. And likewise (in Numb. 16:1 & 3): NOW KORAH BEN IZHAR BEN KOHATH BEN LEVI…. AND THEY GATHERED TOGETHER AGAINST MOSES AND AGAINST AARON. (Gen. 49:6:) NOR LET MY GLORY BE JOINED WITH THEIR ASSEMBLY.] (Cf. Numb. R. 18:5.)

(Gen. 49:6:) FOR IN THEIR ANGER THEY KILLED A MAN, when they killed Shechem ben Hamor. He said to them: You have afflicted me. Immediately (in vs. 7): CURSED BE THEIR ANGER SO FIERCE. These tribes were unable to dwell together. Rather (ibid., cont.): I WILL DIVIDE THEM IN JACOB AND SCATTER THEM IN ISRAEL. Judah came in and < Jacob > praised him (in vs. 8): YOU, O JUDAH, YOUR BROTHERS SHALL PRAISE (rt.: YDH). In your case, your mother gave praise (rt.: YDH) through your name (Judah, rt.: YDH). When she bore you, she said (in Gen. 29:35): THIS TIME I WILL PRAISE (rt.: YDH) THE LORD; < THEREFORE SHE CALLED HIS NAME JUDAH (rt.: YDH) >. And what did she see to praise in Judah? It is simply that she had given birth to Reuben and foreseen Dathan and Abiram (in Numb. 16:1); so she had not given praise over him (i.e., Reuben). She had given birth to Simeon and foreseen Zimri; so she had not given praise over him. She had given birth to Levi and foreseen Korah; so she had not given praise over him. When she gave birth to Judah, she immediately gave praise (rt.: YDH) over him because he made a confession (rt.: YDH) in the Tamar incident, as stated (in Gen. 38:26): THEN JUDAH GAVE ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND SAID: SHE IS MORE RIGHTEOUS THAN I. (See Gen. R. 99 (another version):8 (= p. 1279 in the Theodor-Albeck edition).) His father said to him: Your mother has given praise (rt.: YDH) over you, and you have made a confession (rt.: YDH). Therefore your brothers shall praise (rt.: YDH) you. (Although the Buber text has “him” here, the correct reading must be “you.”) When Isaac blessed Jacob, he had said to him (in Gen. 27:29): AND MAY YOUR MOTHER'S CHILDREN BOW DOWN TO YOU, since he had only one wife. But, since Jacob had four wives, he said (in Gen. 49:8): YOUR FATHER'S CHILDREN < SHALL BOW DOWN TO YOU >. (Gen. R. 66:4.) Why shall your brothers praise you? Because all Israel shall be called by your name, < i.e., > Jews. (Gen. R. 98(99):6. In Hebrew the word “Jews” is simply the plural of Judah, which in turn has the same root as the Hebrew verb meaning “praise.”) And not only that, but out of you is coming the Messiah, who is saving Israel, as stated (in Is. 11:10): BUT A SHOOT SHALL COME FORTH FROM THE STEM OF JESSE…. (Cf. Romans 15:12; Rev. 5:5.)

Choose us out. This alludes to the mighty men who are fearful of sinning. And go out. That is, leave the protection of the clouds, and fight against Amalek tomorrow. Isi the son of Judah said: There are five verses in the Torah in which there are five words whose meanings are unclear: Lifted up, Cursed, Tomorrow, Made like almonds, and Rise up. (These words may be construed with what precedes or with what follows, yielding different meanings.) Shall it not be lifted up? might be understood as in the verse If thou doest well, shall it not be lifted up? (Gen. 4:7), but on the other hand, it might be understood as Shall it not be lifted up even if thou doest not well? (Gen. 4:6). Cursed might be construed as in the verse For in their anger they slew men, and in their self-will they houghed [an accursed] oxen (Gen. 49:6–7), or it may be construed as in the verse Cursed be their anger (ibid., v. 7). Tomorrow might be understood as in the verse Go out and fight with Amalek tomorrow, or it might be interpreted as in the verse Tomorrow I will stand (Exod. 17:9). Made like almond blossoms might be understood as in the verse And in the candlestick four cups made like almond blossoms (Exod. 25:34), or as in the verse Like almond blossoms the knops thereof (ibid.). Rise up might be understood as in the verse Behold, thou art about to sleep with thy fathers, and this people will rise up (Deut. 31:16) or as in the verse Sleep with thy fathers, and rise up (ibid.).

(Numb. 16:1:) “[Korah who is] the son of Izhar [who is] the son of Kohath [who is] the son of Levi betook himself.” But there is not written "the son of Jacob" [or] "the son of Israel." (Numb. R. 18:5; cf.Gen. R. 98:5.) This text is related (to Gen. 49:6), “Let not my soul come into their council,” i.e., that of the spies; “and let not my glory be joined with their congregation,” i.e., that of Korah. Jacob said to the Holy One, blessed be He, “Master of the world, with reference to the spies and with reference to the dissension of Korah, let not my name be mentioned [in connection with] those evil men, who are going to cause provocation. So when should my name (Israel) be joined upon them? When they are joined together to stand on the dais (as Levitical singers), as stated (I Chron. 6:[17,] 22–23) ‘[These are the ones whom David put in charge of song in the house of the Lord….] The son of Assir [who is] the son of Ebiasaph [who is] the son of Korah [who is] the son of Izhar [who is] the son of Kohath [who is] the son of Levi [who is] the son of Israel.’” (Numb. 16:1, cont.:) “Along with Dathan and Abiram.” From here the sages said, “Woe to the wicked one, [and] woe to his neighbor.” (Numb. R. 18:5, cont.; see Neg. 12:6; Sifra to Lev.14:40 (157: Metsora‘, pereq 4); ARN, A, 9; cf. ARN, B, 16; Numb.R. 3:12; Suk. 56b; above, Numb.1:13.) As see that Dathan and Abiram were destroyed by the dissent of Korah, because they were neighbors of Korah. As he was dwelling to the south (of the tabernacle), as stated (in Numb. 3:29), “The families of the Children of Kohath were to camp along the side of the tabernacle to the south.” The standard of Reuben was near them, as stated (in Numb. 2:10), “The standard of the camp of Reuben shall be to the south.” However, the standard of Judah was in the east, and with him were Issachar and Zebulun, as stated (in Numb. 2:3), “Now these camping in front to the east shall be the standard of the camp of Judah.” And near them were Moses, Aaron, and his children, as written (in Numb. 3:38), “Those who camped before the tabernacle, in front before the tent of meeting to the east, were Moses, Aaron, and his children.” Because these were near the Torah, they were therefore worthy to be Torah scholars, as written (in Ps. 60:9), “Judah is my lawgiver.” (Mehoqeq. Most translations render the word as scepter, since kingship was what Judah actually attained.) And it is [also] written (in I Chron. 12:33), “And from the Children of Issachar, those who had an understanding of the times.” And it is [also] written (in Jud. 5:14), “and from Zebulon those who wield the scribal pen.” But Dathan and Abiram, who were neighbors to Korah – the one responsible for the dissent – were struck with him and perished from the world. (Numb. 16:19:) “And Korah gathered [the whole community] against them.” He said to them (in Numb. 16:3), “’You have gone too far, for all the congregation are holy, every one of them.’ (Numb. R. 18:6.) Moreover, every one of them heard on Sinai (in Exod. 20:2 = Deut. 5:6), ‘I am the Lord your God.’ (Numb. 16:3, cont.:) ‘So why do you elevate yourselves?’” Immediately Moses trembled, because it was already the fourth transgression on their hands. It is comparable to a king's son who had transgressed against his father. Now his friend effected a reconciliation with him once, (Rt.: PSY. See the Gk.: peithein, peisai in the aorist.) twice, and three times. When he transgressed a fourth time, the king's friend became discouraged. He said, “How many times shall I bother the king?” So also [it was with] Moses towards Israel. They had sinned with the calf, and (according to Exod. 32:11) “Moses implored.” In the case of the murmurers, (according to Numb. 11:2) “Moses prayed.” In the case of the spies, (according to Numb. 14:13), “Moses said unto the Lord, when the Egyptians hear [what happened].” [So] in the case of Korah's dissension, he became discouraged. He said, “How often can I bother the Omnipresent?” Therefore (in Numb. 16:4), “When Moses heard this, he fell on his face.”

And Moses took his wife and his sons, and set them upon an ass (Exod. 4:20). This is one of the ten verses our rabbis altered when they translated the Torah into Greek for King Ptolemy. (Megillah 9a. The Septuagint, begun during the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 B.C.E.).) The ten changes are: “God created in the beginning” (Gen. 1:1); (Instead of In the beginning God created, in order to emphasize that God alone created.) “I shall make man in My image and My likeness” (ibid., v. 26); (Instead of Let us make man in our image. etc.) “And He finished on the sixth day, and rested on the seventh day (ibid. 2:2); (Instead of And on the seventh day God finished, thus giving the impression that God actually worked on the seventh day.) “Male and female He created him” (ibid. 5:2); (Instead of Male and female He created them, etc.) “Come, let Me descend and confound their tongue” (ibid. 11:7); (Instead of Come, let us go down, etc.) “And Sarah laughed among her relatives” (ibid. 18:12); (Instead of And Sarah laughed within herself.) “For in their anger they slew an ox, and in their wrath they digged up a stall” (ibid. 49:6); (Instead of For in their anger they slew men, and in their self-will they houghed oxen.) “And Moses took his wife and his sons, and made them ride on a carrier of men” (Exod. 4:20); (Instead of… and set them upon an ass.) “Now the time that the children of Israel dwelt in Egypt, and in the land of Goshen and in Canaan was four hundred and thirty years” (ibid. 12:40); (Instead of Now the time that the children of Israel dwelt in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years, etc.) “And he sent the elect of the children of Israel” (ibid. 24:5); (Instead of And he sent the young men of the children of Israel.) “And against the elect of the children of Israel he put not forth his hand (ibid., v. 11); (Instead of And upon the nobles of the children of Israel He laid not His hand.) “Since the Lord thy God hath arranged to give light to all the peoples under the entire heavens” (Deut. 4:19); (The words “to give light” were added.) “Which I had not commanded the people to serve” (Deut. 17:3); (Instead of Which I have commanded not.) they wrote about “the slender-footed,” but they did not write the word ‘arnevet (“the hare”) (Lev. 11:5) because the name of Ptolemy’s wife was ‘Arnevet, (Actually, her name was Arsinoe.) and he might say: “The Jews are ridiculing me by writing my wife’s name in the Torah.”

Let my soul not come into their council (Gen. 49:6). This relates to when Zimri came and had intercourse with Cozbi. Let my soul not be mentioned in reference to them. And that is why it is said: Now the name of the man of Israel that was slain … was Zimri the son of Salu, a prince of a father’s house among the Simeonites (Num. 25:14). His name and the name of his father were henceforth circumscribed, and were not employed again in Israel.

Unto their assembly let my glory not be invited (Gen. 49:6). When Korah assembled the people to oppose Moses, Let my glory not be invited. That is to say, let my glory not be associated with them. Hence the verse stated: The sons of Korah, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi (Num. 16:1), (Korah’s lineage is traced as far back as Levi but not Jacob.) but the text does not say “son of Jacob.” When shall my name be mentioned? By the priests at the altar, as it is written: The son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, the son of Israel (I Chron. 6:22–23).

For in their anger they slew a man (Gen. 49:6). Did they slay only one man? Is it not written: And they came upon the city unawares, and they slew all the males (ibid. 34:25)? The fact is that they were all considered by the Holy One, blessed be He, and by them as one man, as Scripture states: And thou shalt smite the Midianites as one man (Judg. 6:16). Similarly, it states: The horse and its rider hath He thrown into the sea (Exod. 15:1).

When people pronounce a ban, חרם, on someone or something, they have to be most circumspect even when the ban is in itself of a forbidden nature. One needs to be even more careful when one places someone in a ban in consequence of a permissible legal proceeding. We can examine and learn from the extreme caution practised by Joseph's brothers who entered into a conspiracy of silence not to reveal what had happened to Joseph. The secret was therefore kept. Even G–d Himself did not reveal the secret; the brothers had included Him in those upon whom the vow of silence was imposed. It was only shortly before Jacob's death, when the latter reproved his sons and blessed them, that The Holy Spirit revealed to Jacob what had transpired, so that Jacob might be able to admonish his sons prior to his death. During these blessings, Jacob referred pointedly to Shimon and Levi's part in the maltreatment of Joseph (Genesis 49,6 "they tried to uproot the ox"). When a person is close to death, it is time for him to dispense admonitions as well as blessings. Joseph never told his father that his brothers had sold him.

Another difficulty is that we have mentioned earlier is that the brothers had included the שכינה in their conspiracy not to reveal the sale of Joseph to anyone. If Jacob, who was flesh and blood, refused to be associated with the conspiracy of Shimon and Levi, as he said on his deathbed (Genesis 49,6), how could the שכינה have become a party to such a conspiracy?

Then come a series of sibling rivalries. The covenant passes through Isaac not Ishmael, Jacob not Esau. But God sees Hagar and Ishmael’s tears. Evidently He hears Esau’s also, for He later commands, “Do not despise an Edomite [i.e., a descendant of Esau] because he is your brother” (Deut. 23:8). Finally God brings it about that Levi, one of the children Jacob curses on his deathbed – “Cursed be their anger, so fierce, and their fury, so cruel” (Gen. 49:6) – becomes the father of Israel’s spiritual leaders, Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. From now on, all Israel are chosen. That is the second rejection of rejection.

בן לוי, “the son of Levi;” “who made himself a companion to gehinom, hell.” You may ask why the Torah does not also trace him to the founding father of the Jewish nation, to Yaakov? This is answered by a Rabbi Shmuel son of Yitzchok, who says that Yaakov prayed that his name not be associated with such a person as Korach. This is how he understood Genesis 49,6: בקהלם אל תחד כבודי, “let my honour not be associated with their counsel.”

Introduction The Talmud now shows how the Greek elders translated the Torah. The central idea here is that the elders changed the verses to avoid various interpretive or theological problems. Due to the nature of this passage I have lined it up in a table. The middle column is what is written in the Talmud. On the left is the translation of the purported Septuagint. The right side is the actual Hebrew text. I have not translated the Hebrew original but you should be able to understand it from my explanation below. Genesis 1:1: Here they changed the order of the words around. According to Rashi the original order might give the impression that an entity named “Bereshit” created God. The change in order might also serve to emphasize that God preexisted the world. Genesis 1:26: The plural form, which gives the impression of a multitude of gods, was changed into singular. Genesis 2:2: The original is confusing—did God complete creation on the sixth day or on the seventh day? The revised version makes more sense. Genesis 5:2: In the original it sounds like two humans were originally created. The emendation changes the word to the singular. Genesis 11:7: The original is plural and has been emended to the singular. Genesis 18:12: In the Torah, both Abraham and Sarah laugh when told that they will have a child, but God gets angry only with Sarah. This is puzzling. To fix this problem, the translation reads that Sarah laughed in front of her relatives. Abraham laughed only to himself, and that is why God was not angry with him. Genesis 49:6: In the original, Shimon and Levi are accused of killing a person. This is emended so that they only killed an ox. Exodus 4:20: It is a bit dishonorable that Moses has no better vehicle for his wife and kids than a donkey. No horse, no camel! Therefore, the verse is emended. Exodus 12:40: 430 years is emended to 400 years. Exodus 24:5, 11: These verses are problematic because one verse says “the youth” and the other verse says “the nobility.” Therefore, both have been emended to read “the elect” a group more appropriate to be sent to greet God. Numbers 16:15: In the original Moses says he did not take a single “donkey.” This could imply that he did take other objects. To correct this, the emendation reads “valuable item. Deuteronomy 4:19: The original makes it sound like God created the sun, moon and stars so that non-Jews could worship them. The emended version says that they are just for light. Deuteronomy 17:3: The original makes it sound like God didn’t command that the sun and stars should even be created. This would give the impression that they were created on their own or by another god. The emended version clarifies that God didn’t command that people should worship them.

Those were the appointed men. The text mentions these three—Heman, Asaph, and Ethan—who were chiefs of clans of the Levites. For their honor, it provides the genealogy of each of them back to Levi. In fact, in the case of Heman, who was greater and more highly regarded than the other two, it provides the genealogy back to our father Jacob—saying “son of Israel” in connection with him (v. 23)—whereas for the other two it says “son of Levi” (vv. 28, 32) and no more. Indeed, because he was more highly regarded than the others, he would stand in the middle when performing music, with Asaph on his right (v. 24) and Ethan on his left (v. 29). But our Sages explain midrashically (Genesis Rabbah 98:5) that the reason it says “son of Israel” in the genealogy of Heman is that he was a descendant of Korah. For our father Jacob said, “Let not my being be included in their assembly” (Gen 49:6), meaning that my name should not be mentioned in connection with assemblies for which they come together on their own (in the Torah it indeed says, “Korah son of Izhar son of Kohath son of Levi” [Num 16:1]); but in connection with assemblies for which they are gathered together by David for the service of God, my name should be mentioned. So for this reason, it says “sons of Israel.” In this genealogy of Heman, one finds names that are altered from the form that the text utilized above (vv. 7–13). This [feature] is common; one sees it in many places. Some [individuals] had two names: people would call them by one name on one occasion and by another on another occasion. And some people’s names would change a little bit so that the letters of one [version of the] name are similar to those of the other. They were not particular about this, as with “Toah” mentioned here (v. 19), whom the text earlier calls “Tahath” and in the book of Samuel “Tohu” (1 Sam 1:1). Similarly, here it mentions “Zuph” (v. 20) but above “Zophai” (v. 11). And so for Eliel (v. 19), whom above it calls “Eliab” (v. 12) and in the book of Samuel “Elihu” (1 Sam 1:1).

SIMEON AND LEVI ARE BRETHREN. Jacob is saying that they possess the attribute of kinship for their hearts were inflamed concerning their sister. (Ibid., 34:25-26.) He is thus stating in their defense that they acted as they did out of their brotherly zeal, thus suggesting [that were it not for this extenuating circumstance], they would have been deserving of great punishment and their sin would have been unforgivable since what they did to the people of Shechem was an act of violence. The correct interpretation appears to me to be that he is saying that Simeon and Levi are real brothers, uniting in fraternity and brotherhood in counsel and deed. Now I have already explained (Ibid., 34:13.) that Jacob was angry with Simeon and Levi for having committed violence when they killed the people of the city of Shechem, for they (The people of the city committed no wrong. It was Shechem who violated Dinah, and the people were not in a position to protest his action.) had not sinned against them at all. They even made a covenant with them and they were circumcised, thus being enabled to return to G-d and become included within the people of the household of Abraham, part of the souls that they had gotten in Haran. (Above, 12:5. A reference to the proselytes whom Abraham and Sarah had brought “beneath the sheltering wings of the Shechina” (Rashi, ibid.)) Jacob was additionally angry with them lest people say that the matter was done at his suggestion, thus creating a profaning of G-d’s Name, as people will say that the prophet has committed violence and plunder. This is the intent of the verse, Let my soul not come into their council— (Verse 6 here.) this is an excuse for he was not in their council when they answered the people of Shechem with subtlety, (Above, 34:13.) and he was not united in their assembly when they came upon the people of the city and killed them. It was for this reason that he cursed their anger and wrath. (Verse 7 here.) And so did Onkelos translate: “My soul was not in their council when they assembled to strike, etc.”

בן יצהר בן קהת בן לוי [KORAH] THE SON OF IZHAR, THE SON OF KOHATH, THE SON OF LEVI — It does not, however, make mention of Levi being “the son of Jacob”, because he (Jacob) offered prayer for himself that his name should not be mentioned in connection with their (the Korahites') quarrels, as it is said, (Genesis 49:6) “with their assembly, my glory. be thou not united”. And where is his name mentioned in connection with Korah? In the passage in Chronicles where their (the Korahites’) genealogy is traced in connection with the “Duchan” (properly the platform — the place on which the Levites were stationed for the service of song in the Temple), as it is said, (I Chronicles 6:22—23) “the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, the son of Israel” (Midrash Tanchuma, Korach 4).

מה אקב ולא קבה אל HOW SHALL I CURSE WHOM GOD HATH NOT CURSED — Even when they deserved to be cursed, they were not cursed. When their ancestor, Jacob, made mention of their sin — (Genesis 49:6) “For in their anger they slew a man” — he cursed their anger only, as it is said, (Genesis 49:7) “Cursed be their anger”. When their ancestor, Jacob, went to his father with deceit he deserved to be cursed, but what is stated there (Genesis 27:33)? “Yea, he shall be blessed”. In the case of those tribes who had to recite the blessings it is said, (Deuteronomy 27:12) “These shall stand to bless the people”, but in the case of those who had to pronounce the curses it does not state, “And these shall stand to curse the people”, but, “And these shall stand for the curse”, — it does not wish to mention the term “cursing” in direct reference to them (the people) (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 1; Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 12).

Suddenly. (Nachalas Yaakov) There is a difficulty: In Parshas Vayechi it is written “because in their anger they killed a man” (Bereishis 49:6), and Rashi explains “this was Chamor and the people of Shechem who were only considered like one man.” Furthermore: When Rashi writes that as a result “the nations will say” this implies that specifically if they were to die suddenly, the nations would say so. However if they were not to die suddenly then they would not. What is the difference? It appears that one question is answered by the other. In Parshas Vayechi there would be no difference if they were killed suddenly or not, therefore Rashi was forced to say that the people of Shechem were only considered like one man. However here where he wished to conclude that “as a result the nations will say…” this would be understandable if they were to die suddenly in an unnatural manner, then they would know that it was through the hand of Hashem. However, if they were to die one at a time then they could say that they died naturally and thus the nations would not say … You should know that after Moshe’s prayer, Hashem said “I have forgiven them as you said.” Subsequently they died one at a time, and the nations did not say anything.

Where is his name mentioned. Meaning: where is the name of Yaakov mentioned in connection with Korach such that one has to explain why his name is not mentioned here; for surely it is usual for genealogy to be traced back only to the tribe. Re’m writes that there is still a difficulty according to the Midrash (Tanchuma 3) which expounds the verse (Bereishis 49:6) “Do not let my soul come into their plot” as referring to the incident of the spies. Similarly there is a difficulty according to Rashi’s explanation in Parshas Vayechi that “Do not let my soul come into their plot” refers to the incident with Zimri ben Salu, leader of paternal house of Shimon (Bamidbar 25:14). There Rashi did not ask where else the name “son of Yaakov” was mentioned concerning Zimri such that one would have to explain why it was not mentioned. Re’m leaves the matter as requiring further investigation. See what I wrote in Parshas Vayechi that answers the question of Re’m.

However, there is a fifth factor worthy of consideration. Some of the greatest figures in Jewish history did not succeed with all their children. Abraham fathered Ishmael. Isaac and Rebecca gave birth to Esau. All twelve of Jacob’s children stayed within the fold, but three of them – Reuben, Shimon, and Levi – disappointed their father. Of Shimon and Levi he said, “Let my soul not enter their plot; let my spirit not unite with their meeting” (Gen. 49:6). On the face of it, he was dissociating himself from them. (Note however that Rashi interprets the curse as limited specifically to Zimri, descendant of Shimon, and Koraḥ, descendant of Levi.)

Intrinsic to the Nation, Yet Eternally Removed We have examined how the Sages read intimations of separateness and distinction in the private life of Levi, even though a simple reading of Genesis revealed nothing manifestly remarkable. On the contrary! Levi was consistently partnered with Simeon during his lifetime, a fact that was made most explicitly clear by Jacob’s closing summary: “Simeon and Levi – the brothers! Together plying weapons of violence.” (Genesis 49:6.) In finding hints of greatness in Levi even at this ambiguous point, the Sages pointed to latent potential that was only to be realized later in the life of the tribe, at Sinai and Shittim. Zealotry is not a clear-cut characteristic. Murky and dangerous, it took time to discover itself, to clear out the dross of anger and jealousy.

Thirteen things they changed for King Ptolemy. They wrote for him, “God created the beginning (Gen. 1:1; change not found in LXX.) .” “I shall make man in stature and form (Gen. 1:26; change not found in LXX.) .” “Male and his openings He created them (Gen. 1:27; change not found in LXX.) .” “He finished on the Sixth and rested on the Seventh (Gen. 2:2; change found in LXX.) ” “Now I shall descend (Gen. 11:7; change found in LXX.) .” “Sarah laughed in her surroundings, saying. (Gen. 18:12; LXX: “in herself”.) ” “For in their rage they slew a bull and in their will uprooted a trough (Gen. 49:6; change not found in LXX.) .” “Moses took his wife and his sons and let them ride on people-carriers (Ex. 4:20. LXX: “beast of burden”.) .” “The dwelling of the Children of Israel, which they dwelled in Egypt and other lands, was 430 years. (Ex. 12:40. LXX: “In the land of Egypt and the land of Canaan.”) ” And the hare (Lev. 11:6 (in LXX 11:5). LXX: “rough-foot”, a designation of the hare.) , “and the young of foot.” King Ptolemy’s mother was called “hare (The dynasty of the Ptolemies was called the Lagides, after an ancestor Lagos “hare”.) ”. “Not one precious thing I took from them (Num. 16:15; change found in LXX.) ” “Which the Eternal, your God, distributed them to give light to all peoples under all the heavens. (Deut. 4:19; change not found in LXX.) ” “Which I did not command peoples to worship them. (Deut. 17:3; change not found in LXX. The comparisons with the LXX text was done on the basis of Rahlfs’s edition; the history of the text between the time of the Jewish translation in Alexandria and its adaptation by Christian editors in the Roman Empire is unknown. The same list is in the Babli 9a.) ”

Instead of: “Come, let us go down, and there confound their language” (Genesis 11:7), which indicates multiple authorities, they wrote in the singular: Come, let me go down, and there confound their language. In addition, they replaced the verse: “And Sarah laughed within herself [bekirba]” (Genesis 18:12), with: And Sarah laughed among her relatives [bikroveha]. They made this change to distinguish between Sarah’s laughter, which God criticized, and Abraham’s laughter, to which no reaction is recorded. Based on the change, Sarah’s laughter was offensive because she voiced it to others.

They also altered the verse: “For in their anger they slew a man and in their self-will they slaughtered an ox” (Genesis 49:6), to read: For in their anger they slew an ox and in their self-will they uprooted a trough, to avoid the charge that Jacob’s sons were murderers. Instead of: “And Moses took his wife and his sons, and set them upon a donkey” (Exodus 4:20), they wrote: And Moses took his wife and his sons, and set them upon a carrier of people, which could be understood as referring to a horse or a camel rather than the lowly donkey.

The Gemara asks: But if Korah’s lineage is being interpreted disparagingly, why not let the Torah also include: Son of Jacob [Ya’akov], and interpret it: A son who contorted [she’akav] himself until he reached Gehenna? Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak says: Jacob prayed for mercy for himself that his name would not be included in the lineage of Korah, as it is stated: “Let my soul not come into their council; to their assembly let my honor not be united” (Genesis 49:6). “Let my soul not come into their council”; these are the spies. Jacob prayed that his name would not be mentioned in their regard. “To their assembly let my honor not be united”; this is referring to the assembly of Korah.

They [all] introduced [the same] thirteen alterations: (For a comparison of these variants with the Heb. text, cf. on Sof. I, 8.) ‘God created in the beginning’; ‘I shall make a man in image and likeness’; ‘And He finished on the sixth [day] and rested on the seventh [day]’; ‘Male and female He created him’; ‘Come let Me go down’; ‘And Sarah laughed among her relatives, saying’; ‘For in their anger they slew oxen and in their self-will they digged up a stall’; ‘And Moses took his wife and his children and set them upon a carrier of men’; ‘Now the time that the children of Israel dwelt in the land of Canaan and in the land of Egypt was four hundred and thirty years’; ‘I have not taken one desirable thing from them’; ‘And the [beast] with small legs’; ‘Which the Lord thy God hath allotted unto all the peoples to give light under the whole heaven’; ‘And they offer sacrifices to the sun or the moon or any of the host of heaven which I commanded should not be served’.

And Lamech said to his wives, “Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; O wives of Lamech, give ear to my speech. I have slain a person for wounding me, And a lad for bruising me.

Now Korah, son of Izhar son of Kohath son of Levi, betook himself, (betook himself Lit. “took”; nuance of Heb. uncertain.) along with Dathan and Abiram sons of Eliab, and On son of Peleth—descendants of Reuben (descendants of Reuben According to Num. 26.5, 8–9, Eliab was son of Pallu, son of Reuben.) —

My soul will not enter [was not in] their secret council, let my honor not be identified with their assembly [when they gathered to go to war against Shechem I did not descend from my honor and join them]. For in their anger they killed a [”dead”] man, and through their willfulness they maimed an ox [demolished the enemy’s wall].

In their counsels my soul found no pleasure; and in their gathering together at the city of Shekem to destroy it, they were not favourable to my honour; for in their anger they slew kings with princes, and in their wilfulness they sold Joseph their brother, who is compared to the ox.

In their counsel my soul hath not had pleasure, and in their gathering against Shekem. to destroy it mine honour was not united; for in their anger they slew the prince and his ruler, and in their ill will they demolished the wall of their adversary.

This is also similar to what R. Moses Maimonides wrote “to refine the soul,” as is known from the sacred Zohar that the Shechinah is called nefesh (soul) (Cf. Zohar Chadash, Rut 84a; 78c; et passim.) —because she is our life and our soul. And it is written: (Psalms 44:26.) “Our soul is bent low, to the dust.” (Cf. above (note 22), and see Midrash Tehillim 44:2.) And that is why our Sages, of blessed memory, said: “Great is charity, for it brings close the redemption” (Bava Batra 10a.) —to raise (the Shechinah) from the dust, gradually, (See Jerusalem Talmud, Yoma 3:2.) “until Shilo will come.” (Genesis 49:7.)

ארור אפם, “cursed be their anger;” this is not a curse, but a blessing. How so? Yaakov wishes them that whatever they will plan in anger should not succeed, so that they will learn the lesson not to act out of anger. An alternate exegesis of these words: Yaakov exclaims: “how disgraceful and despicable is their anger!”

אחלקם ביעקב, “I will separate them between the tribes of Yaakov and disperse them.” We find that indeed the ancestral share of Shimon became an enclave within the ancestral portion of Yehudah. Levi’s share was divided into 48 cities between the twelve tribes.

CURSED BE THEIR ANGER, FOR IT WAS FIERCE. Jacob either prophesied or offered a prayer that Simeon and Levi’s anger would (or should) diminish and that this would be for their very own good. For curse is the opposite of bless, and as a blessing means an increase, so a curse means a diminution. (Thus Cursed be their anger means may their anger be diminished or their anger will be diminished.)

AND THEIR WRATH. A repetition in different words of their anger. The same is true with I will divide them and And scatter them. The meaning of I will divide them in Jacob, And scatter them in Israel is, Simeon and Levi deserve to be separated and disunited. And so it was. For we find that the lot of the tribe of Simeon fell within the inheritance of the tribe of Judah. (Cf. Josh. 19:1.) Simeon was thus under Judah’s dominion. Furthermore, its cities were discontiguous and scattered throughout the boundary of Judah. (In addition to having their inheritance within the tribe of Judah, their cities were also scattered within Judah’s boundaries (Weiser).) Similarly the forty-eight cities of the tribe of Levi were scattered among the other tribes.

ארור אפם כי עז, "cursed be their anger for it is very strong, etc." Jacob only cursed their excess anger. This is why he added: כי עז. Every person needs to harbour a certain amount of hatred otherwise he could not receive a reward in the Hereafter for having controlled his anger and made it subservient to his duty to serve the Lord. Jacob realised that he had to find a way to "cool" this anger which was liable to flare up from time to time. Inasmuch as both brothers suffered from an excess amount of fire in their genetic mix, Jacob hoped that by separating them from one another he could forestall future outbursts or at least make such outbursts of anger less harmful. This is why he added: "I will separate them within Yaakov, etc."

אחלקם ביעקב¸ ”I will disperse them within Yaakov,” so that they will not be able to conspire together. Yaakov added ואפיצם בישראל, ”and I will scatter them in Israel.” He wanted to make it difficult for the members of these tribes to all assemble in one place simultaneously. History proves that Yaakov’s intention was carried out. The territory of the tribe of Shimon was an enclave within the territory allocated to Yehudah (compare Joshua 19,1), and the Levites were assigned 48 separate towns throughout the territories of the various tribes. The dispersal of the Levites was to prove especially beneficial as it helped fulfill Moses’ blessing in Deut. 33,10 that the Levites were to disseminate Torah knowledge throughout the land of Israel.

You will note that Yaakov did not dispense a blessing to either Reuven, Shimon, or Levi, but instead accused them of faults. He accused Reuven of the indiscretion involving the tent of Bilhah, and he accused Shimon and Levi of their high-handed handling of the males of Shechem. He did see fit to dispense a blessing to all the other sons however.

ארור אפם, whenever we encounter the expression ארור it involves denial of some blessing or something good and welcome to the party subject to the curse. For instance, we read in Maleachi 2,2 וארותי את ברכותיהם, “I will turn their blessings into a curse.” The words ארור אפם must be understood as a type of prayer by Yaakov, who wishes that Shimon and Levi be denied at least a part of their willfulness of character, as something that has become too strong to endure. Yaakov repeated the same thought in different words to make his point more insistently. This is why he added the words ועברתם כי קשתה.

אחלקם ביעקב, so that they will not constantly be next to one another. Shimon’s ancestral territory in the land of Israel actually became an enclave within the boundaries of the land allocated to the tribe of Yehudah. Shimon and Levi (who had no territorial claims after being granted the status formerly occupied by the firstborn after the golden calf episode) had no common territorial boundaries, so that the danger of their joint cooperation resulting in a repeat of what happened at Shechem was drastically reduced. In Bereshit Rabbah 99,7 the words אחלקם ביעקב, are understood as referring to the 24 thousand members of the tribe of Shimon who were killed as a result of Zimri’s brazen act of sexual union with a Midianite princess. This resulted in 24 thousand wives of these men becoming widows, These widows were distributed to the other tribes, 2000 to each tribe, so that anyone having to go begging was from the tribe of Shimon. As a result, G’d said that the Levites were to be similarly distributed among all the tribes seeing he did not deserve a better fate than that of his partner in crime Shimon. Seeing that the Levites became dependent on the tithes, etc, voluntarily given to them by the farmers of the other tribes, their basic livelihood was no less precarious than that of the widows and orphans of the members of the tribe of Shimon who had been killed by a plague by G’d at Shittim.( Numbers 25,9) It is a historical fact then that Yaakov’s prediction came true. Seeing what had happened, G’d elevated the Levites by granting them 10% of the combined harvests of all the other tribes. However, the Levites, just as the members of the tribe of Shimon, had to visit all the threshing floors and request from the local farmers to give the tithe tithes they were obliged to give to a Levite to them. [The Midrash endeavours to justify Yaakov saying both אחלקם ביעקב, and אפיצם בישראל, meaning that each of these tribes will be busy looking for handouts and not have spare time for aggressive ventures such as those hatched by their respective founding fathers. Ed.]

ארור אפם, they shall not succeed to take revenge in their anger and to wreak destruction when it is vented on the innocent. Seeing that they abused their brotherliness in the past, I do not wish to be associated with their method of operation. Their close association is potentially dangerous.

אחלקם ביעקב, the tribe of Levi was scattered between 48 cities throughout the land of Israel and its various tribes, as described in Joshua chapter 21, so that the tribe of Shimon remained isolated from its close associate.

ארור אפם כי עז CURSED BE TIIEIR WRATH, FOR IT IS POWERFUL — Even when he was reproving them he did not curse them but their anger. That is what Balaam said: (Numbers 23:8) “How can I curse them since אל hath not cursed them?” (Genesis Rabbah 99:6)

אחלקם ביעקב I WILL DIVIDE THEM IN JACOB — I shall separate them from each other inasmuch as Levi shall not be numbered among the tribes (cf. Numbers 26:62) and thus they (Simeon and Levi) will be divided (cf. Genesis Rabbah 98:5). Another interpretation is: both of these tribes will be dispersed in Israel, and this happened, for you will find that the very poor — the Scribes and elementary teachers — were all of the tribe of Simeon, and this was so in order that this tribe should be dispersed, since such poor people must wander from city to city to eke out a livelihood. As for the tribe of Levi, He made them travel round from one threshing floor to another to collect their heave offerings and tithes; thus He caused them also to be “scattered” but in a more respectable manner (Genesis Rabbah 99:6).

ארור אפס וגו׳, darum darf auf ihrem אף und ihrer עברה kein Segen ruhen, muss ihre rücksichtslose Heftigkeit vom Fluch gehemmt bleiben. אף, rad. אנף (verwandt mit ענף .חנף ,ענב ,ענף: der Zweig, der die Säfte des Stammes hinausträgt; ענב: die ganz äußerlich gewordenen gesammelten Säfte: die Beere; חנף: wo alles nur äußerlich, ohne alles Innerliche ist: der Heuchler). אנף: die Gemütsbewegung, die nach außen getreten, sich äußerlich im Gesichte etc. ausspricht, (חמה, die Wut, die im Innern kocht). עברה von עבר: die ganz sich überschreitende Wut, das Außersichwerden, Aussichhinausfahren, wobei die Besonnenheit völlig verloren ist. Also: wenn sie etwas in ihrem Zorn wollen, so ist er עז, durch nichts zu überwinden, und ihre עברה ist קשה: hartnäckig, durch keine Vorstellung oder Rücksicht zu schwächen; darum müssen beide von ארור getroffen, müssen ערירים, unfruchtbar, erfolglos gemacht werden, ihr אף und ihre עברה darf nie Propaganda machen können, und demgemäß soll ihre Stellung im künftigen Volke werden. Sie sind zur Führerschaft untauglich, ja als Führer wären sie geradezu gefährlich. Während Reuben zu wenig Selbständigkeit, zu wenig inneren Halt hatte, war in ihnen das Bewusstsein der Kraft zu heiß und kannte, wo es das Gesamtwohl galt, keine Rücksicht. —

Es ist von tiefster Wichtigkeit, daß hier sofort, bei der Grundlegung des jüdischen Volkes, jede, wäre es selbst im Gesamtinteresse, das Sittengesetz und das Recht verkennende Ausschreitung mit Fluch belegt wird. Alle anderen Staaten und Völker vindizierten sich das Prinzip, daß das Gesamtinteresse alles heiligt, List und Gewalt, die im Privatleben mit Verachtung und Galgen bestraft würden, für vermeintliches Staatswohl geübt, mit Bürgerkronen und Lorbeer zu belohnen seien, das Sittengesetz nur fürs Privatleben gelte, Politik und Diplomatie aber nur den Kodex des Interesses kennen dürfen. Das Grundvermächtnis des jüdischen Volkes belegt hier selbst für das gerechteste Ziel im Gesamtinteresse geübte List und Gewalt mit Fluch und verewigt die Lehre, daß selbst im Gesamtleben und für die Gesamtheit nicht nur die Ziele, sondern auch die Mittel und Wege rein sein müssen. —

Es wird jedoch nur ihr אף und ihre עברה mit ארור belegt. Der Fluch trifft weder sie noch ihr Streben an sich.

אחלקם ביעקב ואפיצם בישראל. חלק: teilen, nicht in der Absicht, ein bisheriges zu schwächen, vielmehr: verteilen eines Wertvollen, damit so viele als möglich Anteil daran erhalten.

הָפיץ ,פוץ hingegen: ein Zerteilen in möglichst kleine Teile, damit ein bisheriges Ganze nicht mehr als solches beisammen sei.

יעקב: .die Galutherscheinung des jüdischen Volkes, gedrückt, verfolgt ישראל: die durch Gott gewonnene siegreiche Erscheinung des jüdischen Volkes.

Demnach: die Gefahr für das Gesamtwohl durch Schimeons und Lewis übergroße Heftigkeit ist nur in der Blütezeit des Volkes vorhanden, wo es eine mächtige Gesamtheit bildet, die leicht durch den Einfluss zweier solcher, von glühendem Kraft- und Gesamtgefühl erfüllter, kompakter Stämme hingerissen werden könnte. Darum in אפיצם :ישראל, im blühenden jüdischen Staat sollen sie zerteilt werden. Wie auch geschehen. Lewi erhielt gar keinen Anteil am Lande, und seine Existenz war durch מעשר lediglich auf das freie Wohlwollen jedes einzelnen hingewiesen. Es war ja der jüdische Zehnte, im Gegensatz zu dem späteren und heutigen Zehnten der Kirche und der Gutsherrschaft, durchaus ממון שאין לו תובעים, eine Abgabe, zu welcher der Bodenbesitzer allerdings verpflichtet war, auf welche aber kein Lewite irgend einen direkten Anspruch hatte. Der Verpflichtete konnte den Zehnten jedem aus dem Stamme Lewi geben, der ihm beliebte, und keiner konnte ihn von ihm fordern. Schimeons Gebiet war ganz eine Enklave von Juda und machte ihn völlig von diesem mächtigen Stamme abhängig. Somit war für die Zeit der Blüte Schimeons und Lewis politischer Einfluss völlig paralysiert.

Allein im Galut, wo die Wucht des Geschickes alles niederbeugt, und die Nation selbst auseinander gerissen ist, da liegt die Gefahr, daß alles Selbstgefühl verloren gehe und der Druck jede geistige Kraft ertöte. Auf daß selbst der als Hausierer vagierende Jude auf den europäischen Gassenbuben mit stolzem Selbstgefühl hinabblicke, und er, zu Boden gedrückt und über die Erde hingestreut, das Selbst- und Gesamtgefühl sich bewahre, dazu: אחלקם ביעקב, dazu war es höchste Wohltat, daß die Zerteilung der Stämme Schimeon und Lewi im jüdischen Staate die natürliche Folge hatte, daß, als der Staat in Trümmer ging und die Nation nach allen Gegenden hin zerstreut wurde, in dieser Zerstreuung überall sich auch Söhne Schimeons und Lewis befanden, die die Kraft und den Mut, das Feuer und den edlen jüdischen Stolz durch die Pflege des den Staat überlebenden jüdischen Geistes wach und lebendig erhielten. Zu dem Kern der jüdischen Lehrer der Jugend und der Wissenschaft, kommentiert eine alte Überlieferung, stellen jederzeit die Stämme Schimeon und Lewi das bedeutendste Kontingent. ,משמעון סופרים ומשנים בבתי כנסיות ומשבט לוי בתי מדרשות שהיו עוסקין בתורה "Lehrer der Schrift und der Mischna in den Synagogen von Schimeon, und von Lewi Lehrhäuser, wo das Studium der Torawissenschaft gepflegt wird" (ב"ר צ"ח).

ארור אפם, may their level of anger be reduced, restricted. Yaakov wanted to achieve this by making it harder for them to earn their livelihood, so that they would be fully occupied doing that and caring for their families. They would have to spend their energies by traveling far and wide to secure their livelihood. However, the status of priesthood would remain the domain of the firstborn as it had been before Reuven became guilty of his indiscretion. This status was changed only after the sin of the golden calf when it was transferred en masse to the Levites (some of them). Compare Deuteronomy 10 8, בעת ההיא וגו'.

This is what Bilam meant ... “How can I curse one whom God has not cursed?” “One” refers to Yaakov, as Rashi explains in Bamidbar 23:8.

Another explanation: There will be no poor... There is a question on the first explanation: [“I will divide them” is explained. But] what is the meaning of, “And scatter them throughout Israel?” Thus Rashi brings the second explanation. We need not ask: If the second explanation is for, “And scatter them,” why is it considered another explanation? The first explanation [was only for, “I will divide them,” but] did not explain, “And scatter them.” The answer is: The second explanation goes also on, “I will divide them.” [Accordingly, the verse] means as follows: “I will divide them” from one another. And how will I do this? I will “scatter them.” In other words, “And scatter them” comes to explain, “I will divide them.” (Maharshal)

He allowed his dispersal to be more honorable. “I will divide them throughout Yaakov” refers to Shimon. “Scatter them throughout Yisroel” refers to Leivi. Therefore [referring to Leivi] it is written “Yisroel,” which is a more honorable [as compared to “Yaakov”].

Cursed be their anger, as it is unacceptably fierce , 17 and their wrath, as it is too harsh; I will divide them in Jacob, and I will disperse them in Israel. They will continue to be identified as two tribes, but they will be scattered and will not inherit a permanent portion of land as their brothers will. It should be noted that Jacob did not curse Simeon and Levi themselves, but only their anger.

אחלקם ביעקב, “I will separate them within Yaakov;” this happened indeed. The ancestral portion of the tribe of Shimon was completely enclosed by the territory of the tribe of Yehudah, whereas the ancestral portion of the tribe of Levi did not exist as such at all, but there were 48 cities allocated to that tribe which had been chosen by G’d to be the spiritual mentors of the people, and whose cities also served as alternate cities of refuge for people who had killed human beings through carelessness. Rabbi Joseph Kimchi explains that Shimon and Levi who had demonstrated brotherly love by their jealously avenging the honour of their sister Dinah, employing weapons of war in their pursuit of the perpetrators, were now blessed by Yaakov. He said that when they used such weapons, which are normally cursed weapons, in their rightful anger, as a result of venting their anger in a noble cause, they would henceforth be deprived of such emotions that normally are considered as negative virtues. The word ארור, describes a deficiency, lack of virtue. By distributing them among the various tribes, Yaakov hoped to infuse rightful anger when the occasion would arise also in the hearts of the other tribes. Some commentators hold that Yaakov even wished to share some of this rightful anger and apparently unbridled behaviour demonstrated by these two sons of his, and they understand the word תבוא in אל תבא נפשי in the same sense as Leviticus 22,7 ובא השמש וטהר, where it means that as soon as the sun sets the priest in question is purified, that he too wishes to be purified by having a share in the righteous anger displayed by Shimon and Levi on the occasion in question. I do not believe that such an explanation is tenable, for if it were, how will these scholars explain the words ובקהלם אל אל תחד כבודי, “may my honour not be considered as at one with theirs?”

“Cursed be their anger” [49:7]. Jacob said: cursed should be your anger. That is to say, the Holy One should give that Simeon and Levi should never have cause to curse, so that they should not be able to do anything with their anger. So writes Hizkuni. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 49:7.) Rashi writes. Even when they are worthy to be cursed, yet Jacob did not curse them, but cursed their anger. (Rashi, Genesis, 49:7.)

“I will divide them in Jacob” [49:7]. The teachers and scribes should be from Simeon and they will be dispersed among Israel. The tribe of Levi should also be dispersed so that they go among all the barns for their terumah and tithes. Thus, Jacob caused them to be dispersed among Israel with honor. That is to say, to be teachers and to collect tithes is, with honor. (Rashi, Genesis, 49:7.)

The Ramban derives support for his opinion from the fact that Yaakov strongly criticized Shimon and Levi’s actions (Bereishit 34:30). The Rambam could counter that the Torah (ibid. 31) records the retort of Shimon and Levi to this criticism, to which Yaakov does not respond. On the other hand, the Ramban could reply that Yaakov further criticized Shimon and Levi on his deathbed (Bereishit 49:5-7). Thus, the Torah gives the last word to Yaakov.

The Rambam might respond by noting that Yaakov on his deathbed (Bereishit 49:7) criticized Shimon and Levi for their leading roles in the sale of Yosef, but not for killing the residents of Shechem. (The Ramban would disagree since he believes that Yaakov never discovered that it was the brothers who sold Yosef; see his commentary to Bereishit 45:27.) Indeed, the words “ish” and “shor” used in Yaakov’s rebuke fit Yosef, as he is referred to as a shor in Moshe Rabbeinu’s final blessing (Devarim 34:17) and is called an ish no fewer than fourteen times in Sefer Bereishit.

After having blessed the tribes that represented the priesthood and the monarchy, the tribe that is privileged to host the holy Temple in the future, is blessed next. The fact that Benjamin is G'ds beloved is testified to by that very fact, (verse 12) A major factor is that it was the only tribe wholly uninvolved in the struggle between Joseph and his brothers. Joseph who is the mainstay of the kingdom of the ten tribes, comes next. Since Ephrayim will be the leader of that kingdom, the abundance of blessings heaped on Joseph are partly to be viewed as applying to all the ten tribes, but they are identified with Joseph who had displayed moral fortitude in his encounter with the wife of Potiphar. The reference to Joseph as an ox, has been discussed in chapter thirty. Issachar and Zevulun are named next, being the remaining sons of Jacob's major wives Rachel and Leah. Also, they complete the camp of Yehudah. Zevulun is here mentioned ahead of Issachar though he was younger, in recognition of the fact that he assumed the burden of earning a livelihood for his brother Issachar so that the latter could devote himself to Torah study, (verse 18) The "tents” referred to, are the seclusion of the yeshivah, the Torah academy. Zevulun's maritime activities will be amply rewarded so that he can afford to entertain "nations." Gad's turn is next, since he too was considered a reward from G'd by his mother for having turned her handmaid over to Jacob as a wife. Also, he completes the camp of Reuben and the unnamed Shimon. The blessing marchiv Gad, who expands Gad, refers to the fact that it was this tribe that was the first to settle on the East Bank of the Jordan. It was also he who formed the vanguard when it came to fighting for possession of the West Bank. He considered the fact that Moses, Aaron and Miriam were all buried in his tribal territory, as a good omen for his choice of location, and an insurance of the tribe's future loyalty to G'd and Torah. Dan is head of the army group forming the rearguard. His being described as a hit and run expert, fits Samson the best known of his heroes. Naftali being senior to Asher, is mentioned next. Since the chronological order has not been observed in these blessings, Moses is anxious to conclude the blessings for the individual tribes with Asher, who is not only assured of an abundance of material wealth, but is assured that this will not cause jealousy among his brothers, i.e. "he will remain popular with his brothers." (verse 24) In this way the blessings applicable to the nation as a whole in verse twenty five, are an extension of the bounty promised to Asher. Just as at the beginning of the blessings, the line "may Reuben live and not die," refers to the wish that no sudden death should cut short his normal lifespan, so also at the end of the blessings Moses expresses the wish (verse 25) "and as your young days so shall be your old age," meaning that eventual death should come about only as the result of the natural process of aging. "Riding the heavens" (verse 26), is a symbol of the speed with which G'd may come to Israel's aid when needed. The prophecies of Moses, unlike those of Bileam, are not intended for the distant future. Bileam had spoken about "I can see it, but not now" etc.; not so Moses who describes G'd as "riding the clouds" to Israel's assistance as something in the immediate future. In order to be meaningful, victory must comprise four elements. 1) The victor should emerge unharmed. 2) The enemy must have been harmed. 3) The enemy must be seen to have been hurt. 4) Such hurt must be real, not merely superficial. Moses deals with these four aspects of victory in verse twenty nine. 1) "The shield of Your help." 2) "The sword of Your excellence." 3) "Your enemies will dwindle before you," and 4) "You will tread upon their heights." You will be seen to be enjoying the fruits of victory.

Just as G'd is unable to make the diameter of a square equal the length of its sides at one and the same time, so He cannot make man "in His image and his own form," and at the same time keep him free from sin entirely. The reason is that the definition of being human includes being fallible, being prone to err. Infallibility is reserved for celestial beings that are devoid of bodies. Their perfection derives from their not being physical. Man's perfection on the other hand, is merely potential, inasmuch as his body has been equipped with a spiritual soul. That potential will be achieved only after much practice and study. The very necessity to attend to the needs of his body, creates a time frame during which man cannot concentrate on his spiritual tasks. The Midrash tells us that when the angels first beheld Adam, they wanted to worship him, since they marvelled at the spiritual powers man had been equipped with. Thereupon, G'd showed them man asleep. Only then did the angels realise that owning a body and therefore having physical needs, made man at times much inferior to what they had believed at first. When Isaiah 2,22, exlaims "leave man alone, for his soul is in his nostrils, in what way is he of any consequence?" the idea is that man cannot possibly be considered a deity, since he is matter-bound. Midrash Tanchuma tells us that the emperor Hadrianus, after having conquered much of the then civilised part of the world, wanted to be deified in Rome. There were three philosophers who expressed opposition to this idea. The first one said that it is not proper to start a rebellion while in one's king's palace. If one wants to start a rebellion, believing in the merit of one's cause, one first leaves the palace, and raises the flag of revolt outside. What this philosopher meant was quite simple. Once one has demonstrated one's ability to survive outside the king's palace, -in this case the earth,-which is G'ds palace, one may have established an a priori claim to provide an alternative to G'd. As long, however, as one depends on the palace, i.e. the earth, one should leave well enough alone. The second philosopher said that it was too late to start a rebellion, since both heaven and earth had been created already. There was therefore no way in which a new deity could possibly claim to demonstrate originality. The third philosopher offered to accept Hadrianus' claim on condition that the latter prove his worthiness by helping him out. The philosopher had a treasure laden ship that had run aground three miles from shore. He asked Hadrianus to rescue the ship and its contents. Hadrianus said that he would send a legion of soldiers to do the job. The philosopher told him that no soldiers were needed. All that was needed was a little wind, blowing in the right direction. To this Hadrianus replied: "where am I supposed to take the wind from?" Upon hearing this, the philosopher said to him: "if you cannot even control a little wind, how do you expect to control the whole universe?" Hadrianus returned home, bitterly disappointed. His wife said to him: "these philosophers have deceived you. You are a great king. If you will give me a security deposit, you will indeed become a deity." Said he: "what kind of security deposit?" Said she: "the soul in your body." Said he: "if my soul leaves me, I will be powerless." Said she: "if you cannot even make dispositions regarding your own soul, how can you expect to be a deity? You are only an ordinary mortal." The wife, of course, had hit the nail on the head. Man's potential is only capable of fulfilment within a physical framework, i.e. he cannot dissociate himself from his body; otherwise he dies and is unable to achieve anything at all. Since this is so, the question may well be asked: "what about his freedom of choice? If, by nature, man must sin, how can he be held responsible?" We must distinguish between two causes of sin. If sin is due to causes that are inherent in man's very nature, he is not held responsible for such sin. If sin is the result of a lapse on the part of the sinner, then he is held responsible. When Moses is described as "the most humble of all human beings," (Numbers 12,3) the emphasis is on the word "human being." His perfection is not absolute. To the extent that it is humanly possible, Moses had mastered that virtue, but only to the extent that it is humanly possible. This is in line with the statement by Solomon in Kohelet 7,20. "No human being is so righteous that he will do only good, and never sin." According to Maimonides, the sin Moses allowed himself to fall prey to, was anger when it was not justified. (introduction to Avot chapter 4) Maimonides endeavours to prove that the greater the stature of a person, the less is his tolerance for weakness in others who fail to achieve basic standards of behaviour.

It is clear, then, in respect to the acts of nature and the deeds of man that all things are strengthened and compounded by the addition of like qualities, and it should hold true, also, for base, defective characteristics that they should be strengthened by such compounding. And this is, indeed, absolutely true — but only under one specific condition: that the defect of the added constituent be common to all of the others. For example, if one possesses the evil characteristic of miserliness, then, if he is joined by another possessing the same characteristic, its evil will be compounded and intensified. However, in a collection of individuals, some possessing the defect of miserliness and others that of extravagance, then the activities of the aggregate as a collective body will be more perfect than those of its individual constituents. The same holds true with the elements. For example, if another element possessed the same defect as that of earth, then a combination of these elements would undoubtedly produce an intensification of the defect. This is the intent of the statement in Sanhedrin (71b): "A gathering of the righteous is good for them and good for the world; a scattering of the wicked is good for them and good for the world." This is because the wicked share in common evil characteristics which are intensified when they are gathered together and weakened and diluted when they are dispersed. This accounts for the conduct of our father Jacob towards his sons [Shimon and Levi]: Though he regarded them as righteous, nevertheless, observing in them a common negative characteristic [aggressiveness], he said (Genesis 49:7): "I shall scatter them in Jacob."

Chapter (82) 83: Prophets [1] "I will assemble Jacob, all of you; I will bring together the remnant of Israel;. (Micah 2:12). Like it is said in scriptures: Assemble and listen, and complete [note: last word גומר doesn't exist in verse] (Genesis 49:2). Although the exact time of judgment day is unknown, I say to you that when you gather and assemble, at that moment you will be redeemed, as it is said, "I will surely gather all of you, O Jacob; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold, like a flock in its pasture, a noisy multitude of men" (Micah 2:12). "Reuben, you are my firstborn" (Genesis 49:3), I have not seen a blemish in you since I was born. "My might and the beginning of my strength" (same verse), since the day I was born I have been saying, "Perhaps Reuben will go up to the roof and die, or he will go down and fall." You were the beginning of my strength. "Excelling in dignity and excelling in power" (same verse), and because of the sin you committed, they took three crowns away from you and gave them to your brothers: the firstborn to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingdom to Judah. Otherwise, you would have been the firstborn. "Excelling in dignity," that is the priesthood, as it is said, "And Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things" (Exodus 28:38). "Excelling in power," I was worthy of purifying them, as it is written, "To cleanse and to sprinkle" (Leviticus 14:56). "Unstable as water" (Genesis 49:4), our rabbis have taught that three liquids are forbidden because of exposure: water, wine, and milk. If one finds exposed milk, water, or wine, they should be spilled out, just as you are unstable as water. Alternatively, "unstable" means that you acted recklessly, disgracefully, and insulted others. Just as the vessels in which liquids are poured out or stored become unusable, but the liquids themselves remain, so too you, because of your sin, should not remain. Another thing: is raging like water. Just as water purifies for everyone, so too will you purify your sins when the one who is saved from the water comes to give you blood, and who is this but Moses, as it is written, "She called his name Moses, for I drew him out of the water" (Exodus 2:10). And when does he give you blood? When you spread out your bed (Genesis 49:14), when he comes to ascend Mount Nebo, as it is written, "Let Reuben live and not die" (Deuteronomy 33:6). "Simeon and Levi are brothers" (Genesis 49:5), and not only were they brothers, but they became brothers to do justice, as it is said, "And two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, took each man his sword" (Genesis 34:25). Their weapons are instruments of violence (Genesis 49:5). The Greek language is their swords. Jacob said, "If these two tribes sit together, they will destroy the world. But I will scatter them, divide them among Jacob and disperse them among Israel" (Genesis 49:7). "Judah, your brothers will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies" (Genesis 49:8), referring to his killing of Esau. Similarly, Moses said, "His hands are his to contend with; you helped him against his foes" (Deuteronomy 33:7). "Judah, your lion's cub; from prey, my son, you have gone up" (Genesis 49:9), which is as you were named. So did your mother say, "This time I will thank God" (Genesis 29:35), and she praised God in the story of Tamar, and all the tribes praised her. "The sons of my concubine have risen against me" (Genesis 49:29), Tamar's tragedy, that she and her two sons were already doomed, as it says "they brought her out and burned her" (Genesis 38:24), but she confessed and saved herself and her two sons, just as Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were saved whole when they were thrown into the furnace. "He crouches like a lion, like a lioness--who dares to rouse him?" (Genesis 49:9), referring to David, the anointed one from you, as it says "whose heart is like that of a lion" (2 Samuel 17:10). "Forbidding the vine its fruit [and the donkey's colt to drink] (Genesis 49:11). This refers to the Messiah who will arise from you, as it is written, 'humble and riding on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey' (Zechariah 9:9). And to the flute and the finisher. Where are the Israelites forbidden and their sins atoned for? In the territory of Judah in Jerusalem. 'The scepter shall not depart from Judah' (Genesis 49:10) refers to the kingdom, 'nor a lawgiver' (ibid.) refers to the leader, 'until Shiloh comes' (ibid.) refers to the Messiah, 'and to him shall be the obedience of the people' (ibid.). 'And the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king' (Hosea 3:5), and similarly it says, 'and she ate and was satisfied, and left over' (Ruth 2:14). 'And she ate' refers to the leader, as it is written, 'and from among your brothers you shall appoint a leader' (Deuteronomy 17:15), 'and was satisfied' refers to the kingdom, and 'left over' refers to the leadership. Zebulun shall dwell by the seashore, and he shall be a haven for ships (Genesis 49:13)." "He who makes ships, goes forth and comes back and brings sufficiency to the tribe of Yissachar, who occupy themselves with Torah, as it is said, Yissachar is a strong-boned donkey, crouching among the sheepfolds. And he saw a resting place that was good, and the land that it was pleasant, and he inclined his shoulder to bear, and became a servant to tribute. (Genesis 49:14-15). Those who toil in Torah, as it is said, "And of the children of Yissachar, who had understanding of the times, to know what Yisrael ought to do; the heads of them were two hundred; and all their brothers were at their commandment." (1 Chronicles 12:33). This teaches that two hundred members of the Sanhedrin stood from the tribe of Yissachar, and all of them were with the power of Zebulun, who go out to the sea and bring them [Yissachar] what they need, as it is said, "Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out, and Yissachar, in your tents." (Deuteronomy 33:18)." "Dan will judge his people" (Genesis 49:16). This refers to rest. "Let Dan be a serpent" (ibid. v. 17) refers to Samson, who, just as a serpent bites on its own, so too Samson fought and killed on his own. Another interpretation is that just as a serpent doesn't die if it is bitten on its tail or belly, because it only dies if it is bitten on the head (as it says, "You will strike his head," Genesis 3:15), so too Samson, when he was bound with his hands and feet, and his strength was not known, as soon as his hair was cut, his strength left him (Judges 16:19). Yet, even so, he bit the heels of a horse and its rider fell backward (Genesis 49:17), as he grasped both pillars and brought the house down (Judges 16:29), and Jacob exclaimed, "I have waited for Your salvation, O Lord" (Genesis 49:18). "Gad, a troop shall tramp upon him" (ibid. v. 19) refers to Elijah, who crushed the gang of a certain ruler. "He shall provide the first part for himself" (ibid. v. 20) refers to Asher, whose land produces rich fruits and excellent oil, and he brings olive oil as an offering (ibid.). "Naphtali is a hind let loose" (ibid. v. 21) refers to all those who study the Torah and are beloved to the Almighty like deer, as it says, "A loving hind and a graceful doe" (Proverbs 5:19). "Joseph is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a fountain" (Genesis 49:22). When Pharaoh heard Joseph's interpretation of his dreams, he said that Joseph was wise and discerning (Genesis 41:39). "His eyes are darker than wine" (Genesis 49:12) refers to Joseph's children, whom the other tribes did not begrudge, and the children of Joseph say to Joshua, "We are a numerous people and God has blessed us until now" (Joshua 17:14). Joshua said to them, "This is what you say, and yet you are not afraid of the evil eye?" They replied, "Jacob our father already prayed for us that the evil eye should not rule over us, as it is said, 'Against me [Jacob] was the evil eye' (Genesis 49:27), and Benjamin is compared to a wolf that tears (Genesis 49:27). In the Temple, which was built within its borders, they would sacrifice there one lamb, etc. (Numbers 28:4). Once he blessed each person according to their needs, he made them into tribes, as it is said, 'These are the tribes of Israel' (Genesis 49:28). He said to them, "Behold, I have blessed you," as it is said, 'And this is what their father spoke to them and blessed them' (Genesis 49:28). A faithful man will come and seal my blessings, and who is this? It is Moses, as it is said, 'And this is the blessing with which Moses blessed' (Deuteronomy 33:1)."

“And his soul cleaved to Dina the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman, and spoke comfortingly to the young woman” (Genesis 34:3). “And Shekhem spoke unto his father Hamor, saying: Take me this girl for a wife” (Genesis 34:4). “Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter, and his sons were with his livestock in the field, and Jacob kept silent until their arrival” (Genesis 34:5). “Jacob heard that he had defiled Dina his daughter…and Jacob kept silent” – that is what is written: “But a man of understanding will be silent” (Proverbs 11:12). “And the sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard, the men were saddened, and they became very angry, as he performed a depravity to Israel to lie with Jacob's daughter, and so should not be done” (Genesis 34:7). “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard” – Isi ben Yehuda said: Four verses have no resolution, (It is not clear whether the words in the verses under discussion is the last word of the previous phrase, or the first word of the subsequent phrase. See Yoma 52a–b and Rashi on Yoma 52b.) and they are: “It will be lifted [se’et]” (Genesis 4:7); “Cursed [arur]” (Genesis 49:7); “And will arise [vekam]” (Deuteronomy 31:16); “Shaped like almond flowers [meshukadim]” (Exodus 25:34). Rabbi Tanḥuma adds this one: “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard,” or: “when they heard, the men were saddened.” “And so should not be done” – even among the nations of the world, as from the moment that the world was stricken in the generation of the Flood, they stood and fenced themselves away from licentiousness.

“Simeon and Levi are brothers; weapons of villainy are their heritage” (Genesis 49:5) “Simeon and Levi are brothers” – brothers of Dina but not brothers of Joseph. “Weapons of villainy are their heritage [mekheroteihem]” – he said to them: These weapons in your possession have been stolen by you. For whom are they fitting? It is for mekheroteihem – for Esau, who sold [makhar] the birthright. “Let my soul not come in their company; with their assembly let my glory not be associated; for in their anger they killed men, and with their will they hamstrung oxen” (Genesis 49:6). “Let my soul not come in their company” – when they come to take counsel in Shitim. (When the Israelite men engaged in harlotry with the Midianite women, in Shitim, one of their leaders, who encouraged this practice, was the prince of the tribe of Simeon, Zimri son of Salu.) “With their assembly let my glory not be associated” – when they assemble against Moses in the congregation of Koraḥ. (In these instances, when the Torah identifies the perpetrators of these crimes, who descended from the tribes of Simeon and Levi, the verses do not mention that they are sons of Jacob. ) “With their assembly let my glory not be associated” – but for the platform, let my name be associated, when his descendants stand on the platform, (When the Levites stand on the platform to sing as part of the Temple service. ) as it is stated: “These are those who stood, and their sons, [from the sons of the Kehatites:] Heiman [the singer, son of Yoel, son of Samuel]” (I Chronicles 6:18). Rabbi Huna, Rabbi Ḥanina, and Rabbi Pinḥas: The three of them said: “Son of Yitzhar, son of Kehat, son of Levi, son of Israel” (I Chronicles 6:23). (In the verse regarding the congregation of Koraḥ, his lineage is traced only as far as Levi, but here the lineage is traced back to Jacob.) “For in their anger they killed men [ish]” (The Hebrew ish is in the singular.) – this is Ḥamor father of Shekhem. “Hamstrung [ikeru] oxen [shor]” – they undermined [akartun] the security wall [shuran] of proselytes. (As a result of the massacre following the circumcision of the residents of Shekhem, all proselytes will fear that perhaps the same will befall them after their circumcision.) Rabbi Ḥunya and Rabbi Yirmeya in the name of Rabbi Aḥiya bar Abba: As it is written: “And with their will they hamstrung [ikeru] oxen” – in order to fulfill the will of your inclination, you undermined [akartem] the security wall of proselytes. “Undermined a trough” – this is one of the matters that they emended for King Ptolemy. (The seventy-two elders assembled by King Ptolemy introduced several emendations into the translation of the Torah into Greek (see Megilla 9a). One of them was that instead of writing, “killed men…and hamstrung oxen,” they wrote, “killed oxen…and undermined troughs,” so Ptolemy would not deem them murderers.) “Cursed be their anger, as it is fierce, and their wrath, as it is harsh; I will divide them in Jacob, and I will disperse them in Israel” (Genesis 49:7). “Cursed be their anger, as it is fierce” – Rabbi Ḥunya and Rabbi Azarya in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: [Jacob] increased the number of hot-tempered bohaknin (These were individuals afflicted with bohak, a skin condition characterized by white blotches on the skin. When the blotches appeared on the face, this was considered a sign that the individual was hot-tempered. ) among them. That is what is said regarding one who is afflicted with bohak patches, that he is hot-tempered. Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: [This is analogous] to a king who had a son, and the king foresaw that a serpent was destined to bite his son. He said: May the serpent that seeks to bite my son be cursed. So, [Jacob] came to curse them, but he cursed their anger. “Cursed be their anger, as it is fierce, and their wrath [ve’evratam], as it is harsh” – and their transgression [vaaveratam], as it is harsh. (He did not curse them; rather, he cursed the anger and the transgression that was caused by that anger.) “I will divide them [aḥalkem] in Jacob” – this is the tribe of Levi: “I am your portion [ḥelkekha] and your inheritance” (Numbers 18:20). “And I will disperse them in Israel” – this is the tribe of Simeon. That is what is said: Most of the poor were from the tribe of Simeon. Rabbi Tanḥuma said: Although we explain and say: “And the cities that you shall give from the holding of the children of Israel, [from the greater you shall increase and from the lesser you shall decrease]” (Numbers 35:8), six cities, they and their open land, all of them were from Simeon. (The Torah states that forty-eight cities were to be given to the Levites (Numbers 35:7–8). Of these, nine were from the tribes of Judah and Simeon (Joshua 21:9-16). The midrash states that six of them were from Simeon and only three from Judah, despite the fact that Simeon was a small tribe and had only seventeen cities.) When they saw that he was rebuking them, (When the rest of Jacob’s sons saw that he had rebuked Reuben, Simeon, and Levi.) they began departing to the corners. When he saw that they were departing to the corners, he began calling each and every one.

“Simeon and Levi are brothers; weapons of villainy are their heritage” (Genesis 49:5). Reuben went out and his ears were slumped. [Jacob] began calling: “Simeon and Levi are brothers” – brothers for degradation. He said to them: ‘You were brothers for Dina, as it is written: “Two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dina’s brothers, each took his sword” (Genesis 34:25), but not brothers for Joseph, as you sold him.’ Rabbi Simlai said: In Reuben’s regard it is written: “In order to deliver him from their hand, to restore him to his father” (Genesis 37:22). Reuben was not involved in Joseph’s sale. Judah, too, said to them: “What profit [is there if we kill our brother]?” (Genesis 37:26). These were the eldest; consequently, the two of them sold him. (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah were the oldest sons of Jacob. If Reuben and Judah were not involved in the sale, it must have been Simeon and Levi who organized it. ) Know that it is so, for when they descended to Egypt, [Joseph] took from them none other than Simeon, as it is stated: “He took Simeon from them [and incarcerated him before their eyes]” (Genesis 42:24). That is why [Jacob] called the two of them as one. “Weapons of villainy” – what are weapons of villainy? He said to them: ‘They have been stolen by you; they are not yours. They belong to Esau, in whose regard it is written: “By your sword you shall live”’ (Genesis 27:40). Those are weapons of villainy, and villainy is none other than Esau, as it is stated: “For the villainy to your brother Jacob” (Obadiah 1:10). (Thus, Jacob was saying that the weapons of Simeon and Levi belong to Esau, who is the subject of the verse in Obadiah. ) “Their heritage [mekheroteihem]” – Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is a Greek expression, makhirin, makhirin>. Some say: “Mekhuroteihen” – their residences [meguroteihem], just as it says: “Your origins [mekhorotayikh] and your birthplace” (Ezekiel 16:3). “Let my soul not come in their company; with their assembly let my glory not be associated; for in their anger they killed men, and with their will they hamstrung oxen” (Genesis 49:6). “Let my soul not come in their company” – when Zimri will arise and perform that act with Kozbi, let my name not be mentioned there, as it is stated: “The name of the man of Israel who was slain…[Zimri, son of Salu, a prince of a patrilineal house of the Simeonites]” (Numbers 25:14). (The name of Jacob is not mentioned. ) “With their assembly let my glory not be associated” – when Koraḥ will assemble his congregation to dispute, let my name not be associated with them, but rather, “Koraḥ, son of Yitzhar, son of Kehat, son of Levi” (Numbers 16:1), but it did not say: “Son of Jacob.” “For in their anger they killed men [ish]” – did they kill one man [ish]; is it not written: “They killed all the males” (Genesis 34:25)? It is that they were all considered before the Holy One blessed be He like one man. Likewise it says: “Behold [hen], nations may be regarded like a drop from a bucket…” (Isaiah 40:16). What is hen? In the Greek language, hen is one. Likewise it says: “You will smite Midian as one man” (Judges 6:16). Similarly, “the horse and its rider He cast into the sea” (Exodus 15:1) – like one horse and its rider. (The singular terms are used in order to indicate that God cast all the many horses and riders of the Egyptian army into the sea as though they were just one. ) “Cursed is their anger, as it is fierce, and their wrath, as it is harsh; I will divide them in Jacob, and I will disperse them in Israel” (Genesis 49:7). “Cursed is their anger” – he cursed only their anger. Likewise, the wicked Bilam says: “How will I curse, where God has not cursed” (Numbers 23:8)? If at a time of anger he cursed only their anger, can I come to curse them? (If Jacob was angry at Simeon and Levi and yet, with divine spirit, Jacob cursed only their anger and not them, can I, Bilam, curse the Israelites? ) “I will divide them in Jacob” – how so? Twenty-four thousand fell from the tribe of Simeon in [the incident of] Zimri, and its widows were twenty-four thousand. They were divided into two thousand for each and every tribe, as it is stated: “I will divide them in Jacob.” Everyone who circulates among the doorways [to beg] is from the tribe of Simeon. The Holy One blessed be He said: Levi too will circulate. What did the Holy One blessed be He do? He provided him with his sustenance cleanly, and yet Jacob’s edict was fulfilled. The Holy One blessed be He elevated [Levi] and gave him one-tenth, (The first tithe of produce. ) and he circulates and says: ‘Give me my portion.’ That is why it is stated: “I will divide them in Jacob.”

Issi b. Yehudah says: There are five ambiguous verses in the Torah: "se'eth," "arur," "machar," "meshukadim," and "vekam.": "se'eth" — (Genesis 4:7) "If you do well, you will be forgiven (se'eth)" or "You will bear your sin (se'eth), if you do not do well." "arur" — (Ibid. 49:7) "Arur (Cursed) is their wrath, for it is fierce" or (Ibid. 6) "for in their wrath they slew a man, and in their wilfulness they razed an ox. Arur ("they are cursed.") "machar" ("tomorrow") — (Exodus 17:9) "Machar I will stand on top of the hill" or "Go out and do battle with Amalek machar." "meshukadim" ("of beaten work") — (Exodus 25:34) "meshukadim its bulbs and its flowers" or "in the menorah, four bowls meshukadim." "vekam" — (Devarim 31:16) "Vekam ("and there will arise") this people and they will stray, etc." or "you shall lie down with your people vekam" ("and arise"). These are the five ambiguous verses in the Torah.

Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce (Gen. 49:7). Since He cursed only their anger, Balaam said: How shall I curse whom God hath not cursed? (Num. 23:8). That is to say, inasmuch as He cursed their anger alone, at a time when He was sorely displeased with them, how am I able to curse them?

I will divide them in Jacob (Gen. 49:7). Twenty-four thousand men of the tribe of Simeon perished because of the act of Zimri. He apportioned their twenty-four thousand widows, two thousand to each tribe, as it is said: I will divide them in Jacob. Every one who is forced to go from door to door will be of the tribe of Simeon. (It would be the poorest tribe and would have to go about begging.) The Holy One, blessed be He, said: But surely the descendants of Levi will also go about begging? (Since it would not own land and would therefore have no visible means of support.) What did He do about it? He caused them to obtain their food honorably. He thus fulfilled Jacob’s prophecy by permitting him (the priest) to receive one of the tithes. He would go about at threshing time, saying: “Give me my portion.” Therefore he said: I will divide them in Jacob. Thus Simeon and Levi went out with blanched faces.

Simeon and Levi were moved by a great zeal on account of the immorality, as it is said, "And they said, Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?" (Gen. 34:31). And each man took his sword and slew all the men of Shechem. When Jacob heard thereof, he became sorely afraid. For he said: Now all the people of the land will hear, and they will gather together against me || and smite me. He began to curse the wrath of his sons, as it is said, "Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce" (Gen. 49:7); and he also cursed their sword in the Greek language, for he said: "Weapons of violence are their swords" (Gen. 49:5). All the kings of the earth heard (thereof) and feared very much, saying: If two sons of Jacob have done all these great things, if they all band themselves together, they will be able to destroy the world. And the dread of the Holy One, blessed be He, fell upon them, as it is said, "And the terror of God was upon the cities,… and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob" (Gen. 35:5).

“…for your love is better than wine” (Song of Songs 1:2). We learned there (Mishna Avoda Zara 2:5): Rabbi Yishmael asked Rabbi Yehoshua as they were walking on the way: ‘Why did [the Sages] prohibit the cheese of the gentiles?’ [Rabbi Yehoshua] said to him: ‘Because they curdle it with the stomach contents of an animal carcass.’ He said to [Rabbi Yehoshua]: ‘But are the stomach contents of a burnt offering not more stringent than the stomach contents of an animal carcass, yet they said that a priest who is broad minded (He is not particular about what he eats.) swallows it raw.’ What is, swallows it raw? He gulps it down. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: They rendered it like a tainted cup; he may not benefit, but he is not liable for misuse of consecrated items. (Thus, if one eats the stomach contents of a consecrated animal, one is not liable for misuse of a consecrated item. This proves that it is not considered a food item, therefore its consumption is not a normal act of eating. Similarly, the stomach contents of an unslaughtered animal carcass should not be considered a food item, and should not render the cheese non-kosher.) [Rabbi Yishmael] said to him: (In the mishna, this is stated as a response to a second explanation given by Rabbi Yehoshua for the prohibition of eating the cheese of gentiles: They curdle it in the stomach contents of animals that have been slaughtered as an idolatrous sacrifice.) ‘If so, why did they not prohibit benefit from it?’ [Rabbi Yehoshua] diverted his attention to another matter. He said to him: ‘Yishmael, my brother, how do you read it? For Your love [dodekha] is better than wine, or your love [dodayikh] [is better] than wine?’ (Do you think that the term “your love” is stated in the masculine form [dodekha], indicating that it is being stated by the woman, representing Israel, to the man, representing God, or is it stated in the feminine form [dodayikh], indicating that it is stated by the man, representing God, to the woman, representing Israel. Rabbi Yishmael answered that it is vocalized dodayikh, in the feminine.) He said to him: ‘The matter is not so, as its counterpart teaches in its regard: “Your oils [shemanekha] have a goodly fragrance”’ (Song of Songs 1:3). (Just as this verse is in the masculine, so, too, the previous verse, which is the verse under discussion, is also in the masculine.) Why did he not reveal it to him? (Why did he divert his attention rather than answering his question?) Rabbi Yonatan said: It is because they had prohibited it only recently, (When the Sages issue a decree, for the first year they do not reveal the reason behind it, so that people will accept the decree without questioning its rationale.) and Rabbi Yishmael was young. Rabbi Shimon ben Ḥalafta and Rabbi Ḥagai in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman [said]: It is written: “Lambs [kevasim] will be for your garments” (Proverbs 27:26). Kevashim, concealed items, is written. (The word, as written, can be read either kevasim or kevashim.) When your students are young, conceal matters of Torah from them. When they grow and become Torah scholars, reveal the secrets of Torah to them. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai taught: “These are the ordinances that you shall place [tasim] before them” (Exodus 21:1), just as this treasure [sima] is not revealed to every person, the same is true of matters of Torah. Rav Huna raised a question and Rabbi Ḥama bar Ukva posed a difficulty: (Some suggest that the text should read: Rav Huna, citing Rabbi Hama bar Ukva, posed a difficulty (Etz Yosef).) If he sought to divert him, he should have diverted him from the five verses in the Torah that require resolution. (In each of these cases there are two phrases, and it is unclear whether a particular word which appears at the border of the two belongs to the first or second phrase.) These are they: “se’et” (Genesis 4:7); “cursed” (Genesis 49:7); (Does “cursed” belong to the previous verse: “And with their will they hamstrung an ox that is cursed” or does it belong to the beginning of this verse: “Cursed is their wrath, as it is fierce”? ) “tomorrow” (Exodus 17:9); (Is it “Go out and battle Amalek tomorrow” or is it “Tomorrow I will stand at the top of the hill”?) “crafted like almonds” (Exodus 25:34); (Is it “four cups crafted like almonds,” or is it “like almonds are its knobs and flowers”?) “arise” (Deuteronomy 31:16). (Is it “you will lie with your ancestors and arise,” or is it “this people will arise and it will stray”?) Is it, “if you do well you will receive forgiveness [se’et],” or is it “you will bear your sin [se’et] if you do not do well”? Rabbi Tanḥuma said: I have another: “The sons of Jacob came from the field when they heard” or “when they heard [the men were saddened] and they came from the field” (Genesis 34:7). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: It is written: “And the Lord commanded me” (Deuteronomy 4:14); there are matters that He said to me myself, and there are matters that He told me to say to my children. (Some matters of Torah are meant to publicized to all, and others are meant to be communicated only to those who are worthy.) Rabbi Eila said: There are matters that one seals [meshikin] (This is derived from yishakeni. Rabbi Yehoshua raised this verse to Rabbi Yishmael in order to allude to the fact that not everything is meant to be publicized (Matnot Kehuna).) in one’s mouth. How so? One verse says: “I store Your saying in my heart, so as not to sin against You” (Psalms 119:11), and one verse says: “With My lips I have recounted all the ordinances of Your mouth” (Psalms 119:13). In what sense can both these verses coexist? Rather, as long as Ira HaYa’iri, David’s mentor, was alive, “I store Your saying in my heart”; when he departed, “with my lips I have recounted.” (David did not publicize halakhic matters during the lifetime of his teacher because a disciple is prohibited from issuing halakhic rulings in the presence of his teacher (Eruvin 63a).)

(Devarim 33:8) "And of Levi he said": Why was this (blessing) said of him (and not of Shimon)? Shimon and Levi drank of one cup, viz. (Bereshith 49:7) "Cursed be their wrath, for it is fierce, and their anger, for it is sore. I shall divide them in Jacob, and I shall scatter them in Israel." This is analogous to (the situation of) two, who borrowed from the king. One paid him back, and borrowed from him again, and the other — not only did he not pay him back, but he borrowed again. Thus, Shimon and Levi: Both "borrowed" in Shechem, viz. (Bereshith 34:25) "And there took, two sons of Jacob, Shimon and Levi, each man his sword, and came upon the city (Shechem) secure, (in that the men were ailing from the circumcision), and they killed every male." Levi paid back what he borrowed in the desert, (in the incident of the golden calf) viz. (Shemoth 32:26) "And Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and he said 'Whoever is for the L-rd, (let him come) to me!' And there gathered unto him all the sons of Levi, etc." And he returned and "borrowed" from the L-rd in Shittim, viz. (Bamidbar 25:11) "Pinchas the son of Elazar the son of Aaron the Cohein turned My wrath away from the children of Israel when he raged My rage in their midst, and I did not consume the children of Israel in My wrath" — whereas Shimon, not only did he not repay the loan, but he went and "borrowed" again, viz. (Ibid. 14) "And the name of the man of Israel who was smitten, who was smitten together with the Midianite woman, was Zimri the son of Salu, chief of a father's house in the house of Shimon."

When people pronounce a ban, חרם, on someone or something, they have to be most circumspect even when the ban is in itself of a forbidden nature. One needs to be even more careful when one places someone in a ban in consequence of a permissible legal proceeding. We can examine and learn from the extreme caution practised by Joseph's brothers who entered into a conspiracy of silence not to reveal what had happened to Joseph. The secret was therefore kept. Even G–d Himself did not reveal the secret; the brothers had included Him in those upon whom the vow of silence was imposed. It was only shortly before Jacob's death, when the latter reproved his sons and blessed them, that The Holy Spirit revealed to Jacob what had transpired, so that Jacob might be able to admonish his sons prior to his death. During these blessings, Jacob referred pointedly to Shimon and Levi's part in the maltreatment of Joseph (Genesis 49,6 "they tried to uproot the ox"). When a person is close to death, it is time for him to dispense admonitions as well as blessings. Joseph never told his father that his brothers had sold him.

Reuben, you are my firstborn…. Unstable as water, you will not excel…. Simeon and Levi are brothers. Their swords are weapons of violence…they have killed men in their anger and hamstrung oxen as they pleased. Cursed be their anger, so fierce, and their fury, so cruel!” (Gen. 49:3–7)

Simeon and Levi are brothers – their swords are weapons of violence. Let me not enter their council, let me not join their assembly, for they have killed men in their anger and hamstrung oxen as they pleased. Cursed be their anger, so fierce, and their fury, so cruel! I will scatter them in Jacob and disperse them in Israel. (Gen. 49:5–7)

Thus, at Jacob’s death, he said to them, “Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce.” (23. Gen. 49:7. For a differing interpretation, one that is more critical of Jacob’s role, see M. Sternberg, “’Izun ‘Adin Be-Sippur ‘Ones Dinah,” Ha-Sifrut, 1973, pp. 195 ff.) This was all written by the writer of the Torah to reprove us, and to teach us knowledge. And if by our sins we transgressed and erred (in the past), we continue to do so today.

Similarly, by giving names that can mean either happiness or tragedy, Hashem gives a choice to Machlon and Kilyon — you choose your destiny. It is up to you. The dual meanings of their names convey that they were not destined to fail — they could either have a joyful life or a life of destruction. Unfortunately, they chose poorly, which led to their downfall. (The same may be said regarding the destiny Yaakov Avinu assigned Shimon and Levi, that they will be scattered among the Jewish people (Bereishit 49:7). Yaakov Avinu told Shimon and Levi that they were to decide and shape their own destiny — they can choose to be scattered due to failure, or they can choose to be scattered due to tbeing the spiritual leaders of Am Yisrael. Levi and his family resolved to dramatically “up their game,” and became the best they could be. And they were a smashing success! They emerged as the spiritual leaders of Am Yisrael. They used the harsh words of Yaakov Avinu to propel their shevet to the greatness that lasts until today. )

It is possible to explain the choice of Bileam’s words מה אקב לא קבה א-ל as a reference to Yaakov who had been called א-ל by G’d Himself (Genesis 33,20). How could one curse someone who was characterised by G’d Himself as possessing divine attributes? Even when Yaakov had been angry (at his sons Shimon and Levi) and he had cursed (Genesis 49,7), he did not curse the two sons but only their anger, אפם. When Bileam continued: “how can I be wrathful when Hashem has not been wrathful?” He meant that during all these 40 years G’d had not been sufficiently angry at them. His own wisdom was only effective if G’d had first been sufficiently angry at the people (Berachot 7).

The sons of Simeon. The text provides an abridged account of Simeon’s progeny after that of Judah because their portions rendered them neighbors (it presents [the Simeonites’] portion together with their progeny [vv. 28–43]), as it says, “The portion of the Simeonites was part of the territory of the Judahites; because the share of the Judahites was larger than they needed, the Simeonites received a portion inside their portion” (Jos 19:9). For they did not have their own portion as did the other tribes: this is the meaning of “I will scatter them in Jacob” (Gen 49:7).

LET REUBEN LIVE. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that “he began with Reuben because he was the firstborn. He did not mention Simeon because of the sin of [Baal] Peor, because the worshippers were Simeonites, the proof being their numbers, (In the first census the tribe of Simeon numbered 59,300 (Numbers 2:13). In the second census [after the Peor affair] they numbered 22,200 (ibid., 26:14), a decrease of 37,100 people. In the opinion of Ibn Ezra the decrease would be accounted for by the 24,000 people that died in the plague because of the Peor affair (ibid., 25:9) thus indicating that the idol-worshippers were exclusive of that tribe. On this point, Ramban will comment that even assuming that all 24,000 who died in the plague were from the tribe of Simeon, there are still 13,100 people unaccounted for, a discrepancy that cannot be explained by Ibn Ezra’s theory.) and their prince, too, being killed [in the affair].” In my opinion, the numbers are no proof because over thirteen thousand are still unaccounted for, aside from those who died in the plague. (In the first census the tribe of Simeon numbered 59,300 (Numbers 2:13). In the second census [after the Peor affair] they numbered 22,200 (ibid., 26:14), a decrease of 37,100 people. In the opinion of Ibn Ezra the decrease would be accounted for by the 24,000 people that died in the plague because of the Peor affair (ibid., 25:9) thus indicating that the idol-worshippers were exclusive of that tribe. On this point, Ramban will comment that even assuming that all 24,000 who died in the plague were from the tribe of Simeon, there are still 13,100 people unaccounted for, a discrepancy that cannot be explained by Ibn Ezra’s theory.) In addition, other tribes as well diminished in population, for the sons of Gad lost five thousand, (In the first census the Gadites numbered 46,500 (Numbers 2:15), and in the second census they were 40,500 (ibid., 26:18) — a decrease of 5,150. — And so perhaps we should assume that these deaths resulted from the plague because of Peor.) and the sons of Ephraim, eight thousand! (In the first census the tribe of Ephraim numbered 40,500 (Numbers 2:19), and in the second census they were 32,500 (ibid., 26:37) — a decrease of 8000.) Moreover, from the verse which states, And Israel attached himself unto Baal-peor, (Numbers 25:3.) and it is said again, Take all the chiefs of the people (Ibid., Verse 4.) it would appear that there were some among them from all the tribes, and that all their judges passed sentence on them. And similarly He said, so that I consumed not the children of Israel in My jealousy. (Ibid., Verse 11.) Now do not rejoin against me from the affair of Achan where He said, Israel hath sinned (Joshua 7:11. In this part of the verse the specific sin is not mentioned yet. It is stated at the end of that verse: Yea, they have even taken of the devoted thing. — For the significance thereof see Ramban further.) [although it was but a single individual who sinned; similarly we can say that it was the tribe of Simeon alone that sinned in the affair of Peor yet Scripture describes it as if the entire nation sinned. This rejoinder is not valid, for] there, [the details of] the sin had not yet been revealed, so He mentioned Israel generally [but in the case of Peor the facts of the sin were clearly given and still He spoke of all Israel, which shows that people from all the tribes were among the worshippers of Peor]. Similarly, the identity of the victim [i.e., Zimri, a leader of the Simeonites] is no proof [that only his tribe sinned, as Ibn Ezra argues], for he [Zimri, the son of Salu] was only a prince of a fathers’ house (Numbers 25:14.) of that tribe, not the prince of the [entire] tribe. Those who assembled against G-d in the congregation of Korach were greater and more honorable people than he [Zimri], for they were princes of the congregation, (Ibid., 16:2.) yet all their tribes did not follow them! Additionally, the psalm [that relates the sins of the wilderness] mentions Dathan and Abiram and their affair by name, saying, The earth opened and swallowed up Dathan, and covered the company of Abiram; (Psalms 106:17. The verse indicates that, despite the fact that princes of the congregation were in the company of Korach, the general population did not follow them, for the psalm specifies the participants in the strife.) and it [the same psalm] mentions They attached themselves also unto Baal-peor (Ibid., Verse 28.) together with Moreover, they scorned the desirable Land (Ibid., Verse 24.) which applies to the general population! (Thus it is clear that the worshippers of Baal-peor came from all the tribes, just as those who scorned the desirable Land came from among the entire people. This contradicts Ibn Ezra’s view that only the tribe of Simeon was involved in the affair of Peor.) Forbid it also that Moses should refrain from blessing the tribe of Simeon, [when it is said] that a tribe be not blotted out from Israel! (Judges 21:17.) For all those who had joined Baal-peor had already died, as it is said, for all the men that followed Baal-peor, the Eternal thy G-d hath destroyed from the midst of thee, (Above, 4:3.) and it is written of those who survived, But ye that did cleave unto the Eternal your G-d are alive every one of you this day. (Ibid., Verse 4.) And why should he not bless them? They all made the [golden] calf and sinned in the affair of the spies, yet they were forgiven, and he blessed them! Now, I have seen in Midrash Rabbah the following text: (Bamidbar Rabbah 21:9.) “Six families were eliminated because of the immorality caused by Balaam’s advice [that Israel could be corrupted through seduction], and so Scripture listed one family less of Simeon (Genesis 46:10 lists six sons of Simeon, while in the second census only five are given (Numbers 26:12-13).) and five less of Benjamin.” (Genesis 46:21 lists ten sons of Benjamin, while in the second census only five are given (Numbers 26:38-39).) Thus, according to the opinion of the Rabbis [the tribe of] Benjamin had a greater part in the sin than did the tribe of Simeon — yet Benjamin is included in the blessing! (Further, Verse 12.) In my opinion, the correct interpretation is that Scripture considers the tribes of Israel as only twelve. So it stated in Jacob’s blessing, All these are the twelve tribes of Israel. (Genesis 49:28.) Now Jacob mentioned his twelve sons and considered Joseph to be one tribe (Ibid., Verses 22-26.) [instead of enumerating Ephraim and Menasheh separately as is sometimes done]. Moses saw fit to consider Joseph as two tribes, as he said, And they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Menasheh. (Further, Verse 17.) This was for two reasons: one, since the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded and made them two tribes regarding the dedication of the altar, (Numbers 7:48 and 54.) the flags (Ibid., 2:18-21.) [designating the tribal encampments in the wilderness], and the inheritance of the Land, (Ibid., 34:23-24.) he [Moses] had to count them as two [separate tribes] for their blessing. Secondly, he referred to Joshua, who would make them possess the Land, and he was from Ephraim, the younger son [of Joseph], therefore Moses had to mention his brother [Menasheh] who was older than him. Now, he also wanted to bless [the tribe of] Levi, for, through his blessing, all Israel would be blessed, in that his offerings shall be acceptable before G-d on their behalf. Hence it was necessary to omit one of the tribes, for nowhere [in Scripture] are they enumerated except as twelve, corresponding to the twelve constellations in the firmament, (Bamidbar Rabbah 14:29.) the twelve months of the year, and the twelve “border diagonals” (Sefer Habahir, 95. — This is a Cabbalistic term for the twelve mystic powers emanating from various combinations of the letters of the Great Divine Name. See my Hebrew commentary p. 495.) concerning which the Rabbis have said in the Midrash (Bamidbar Rabbah 14:29.) that they are the everlasting arms. (Further, Verse 27.) As the Sages mentioned in Tractate Berachoth: (Berachoth 32b.) “The Holy One, blessed be He, said to the prophet, (I.e., Isaiah. In our text of the Gemara: “The Holy One, blessed be He, said ‘to her': My daughter …”) Go and tell the congregation of Israel: My daughter, I have created twelve constellations in the firmament to correspond to the twelve tribes.” Similarly, at Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal where Scripture counts Levi, (See above, 27:12.) Joseph is not mentioned as two tribes (See above, 27:12.) [because, there Simeon (See above, 27:12.) is mentioned]. Likewise you will see in the distributions of Ezekiel that he counts Joseph as two tribes (See Ezekiel 48:4-5.) with reference to the apportioning of the Land and did not mention Levi. On the other hand, in enumerating the city exits [of Jerusalem] he mentioned, the gate of Levi, one (Ibid., Verse 31.) and did not list the tribe of Joseph as two tribes; instead he said, the gate of Joseph, one, (Ibid., Verse 32.) since the tribes are always counted as only twelve. I have already mentioned this in the section Vayikach Korach. (Numbers 17:12 (see Vol. IV, pp. 189-190).) Accordingly, Simeon was left out [of Moses’ blessings] since his tribe was not large and it was not the intention of the blessing of Jacob, their father, that they become numerous. Instead he divided them in Jacob and scattered them in Israel, (See Genesis 49:7.) and to that extent they, too, were blessed through the blessing of the rest of the tribes among whom they were. Now the order of this blessing [of Moses] was by [dictate of] Ruach Hakodesh (the Holy Spirit) according to their inheritance. He began with Reuben for he occupied his inheritance first; (Joshua 13:15.) and, also, for he was the firstborn, (I Chronicles 5:1.) and Moses prayed for him that his name not be blotted out because of his sin; therefore, in his blessing, he accorded him the right of the firstborn. (Above, 21:17.) Then he mentioned Judah for he was the first to inherit within the Land [proper] (Reuben’s possession was beyond the Jordan eastward.) and of him came he that is the prince, (I Chronicles 5:2. Reference is to David.) and he was the first to advance to war [against the Canaanites], (Judges 1:2.) concerning which Moses blessed him [saying, his hands shall contend for him, and Thou shalt be a help against his adversaries]. (Verse 7.) Thus Judah’s blessing embraces all Israel. Then Moses blessed Levi — who dwelled with the children of Judah in Jerusalem, and there their offerings should be acceptable. Afterwards he blessed Benjamin because their inheritance was with the children of Judah, and, [because] the city of Jerusalem and the Sanctuary were between the children of Judah and the children of Benjamin, and the Levites abode with both of them. Then he blessed the children of Joseph for such was their inheritance, as it is said, And the lot of the tribe of the children of Benjamin came up according to their families; and the border of their lot went out between the children of Judah and the children of Joseph. (Joshua 18:11.) Afterwards he continued to bless the children of the mistresses, (I.e., Leah and Rachel, who were the heads of their households. Here, though, it refers only to Leah, since Rachel’s children — Benjamin and Joseph — were already blessed.) and mentioned Zebulun before Issachar (See further, Verse 18.) as Jacob had done. (See Genesis 49:13-14.) So, too, [in the division of the Land] the third lot fell to the children of Zebulun (See Joshua 19:10 (Zebulun). Ibid., Verse 17 (Issachar).) and the fourth lot to the children of Issachar. (See Joshua 19:10 (Zebulun). Ibid., Verse 17 (Issachar).) Then he blessed the children of the handmaids (Bilhah and Zilpah.) — Dan, Naphtali, and Asher — in order of their birth, (The order of their birth was: Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher (Genesis 30:6-13). Here, the order is: Gad (Verse 20-21), Dan, Naphtali, Asher (Verses 22-24). Ramban will proceed to explain why Gad is first.) and they were also [encamped] under the same standard. (Numbers 2:25-30.) He mentioned Gad [born after Naphtali] before all the children of the handmaids, because he occupied his inheritance earlier with Reuben, (See Joshua 13:23-24.) the first of all, and he was [encamped under] Reuben’s standard. (Numbers 2:10-14.) Let Reuben live, and not die. “The meaning thereof is that his tribe shall live and never die. (In other words, this is to be understood as a prayer rather than a blessing. — It is so clearly stated in our text of Ibn Ezra. Ramban also mentioned above, “and Moses prayed for him etc.”) And let his men be a number. This is like the verse, And I have not learned wisdom and the knowledge of the Holy One I have (Proverbs 30:3.) [where the word not from the first part of the verse, applies to the second part as well – ‘and the knowledge of the Holy One I have not.’ Here, too, the word not from the expression and ‘not’ die applies to the second part, thus meaning] ‘and let his men not be a number,’ that they may not become few, for whatever can be counted, is few. So also, and I am few in number.” (Genesis 34:30.) This is the language of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra. It is more correct to explain: “Let Reuben live in Israel; and not die, that his tribe at no time should be cut off, and that his numbers always be among the count of the children of Israel.” He prayed for him that his name not be cut off from Israel because of the anger with which his father was wroth with him when he defiled his couch. (Ibid., 49:4.) This is similar to what is stated there, and Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard of it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve; (Ibid., 35:22.) Scripture made it be known that he was not excluded from that number on account of his sin. Rashi also explained it this way. And the meaning of his men [and let ‘his men’ be numbered among the men of Israel] is that all his men should deserve this [to be included in the ranks of Israel], and not even part of their tribe be cut off because of his [Reuben’s] sin. Perhaps the expression his men refers to the heads of the four families [of the tribe of Reuben — Hanoch, Pallu, Hezron, and Carmi], (Exodus 6:14.) and the meaning of the word mispar (number) is like b’mispar [with the prefix beth meaning “in the number,” the verse stating: “and let his men be ‘in’ the number” of the children of Israel]. Similarly, to play the harlot ‘beith’ [literally: “the house of”] her father (Above, 22:21.) [means b’veith — “in the house of” her father]; they shall wash ‘mayim’ (Exodus 30:20.) [literally: “water,” means b’mayim — “with water”]. There are many similar cases. Or it may be that the meaning thereof is that in the census of Israel his men be counted first as is the right of the firstborn, for number one is the unit from which all numbers originate. (See Ibn Ezra to Exodus 3:1.) Onkelos rendered it: “And his children will receive their inheritance among their numbers.” He meant what we have explained, saying that Reuben will live and not be cut off [from Israel] and his men will be counted among their numbers forever. His tribe will not be blotted out from Israel but they will not be counted on account of their large numbers as forming two tribes. Thus he deprived him of the birthright [that awards the firstborn with a double share], but he assured him of being forever one tribe. And some commentators (I have found this interpretation in Chizkuni: “Let Reuben live, and not die when he will pass over the Jordan armed before the children of Israel. And his men be a number — in the same number that they will pass over there [into the land of Canaan] may they return, without a single one lacking.”) explain that this blessing refers to the conquest of the Land, the verse stating that the Reubenites will live when crossing [the Jordan] armed for war before the children of Israel. And the purport thereof is that they will prevail, and not be defeated, similar in meaning to the expression, and by thy sword shalt thou live. (Genesis 27:40.) And let him not die, that none of them should die in battle, and his men be a number that they should return to their homes in their [original] number, there lacking not one man of them. (Numbers 31:49.) Similarly, in the blessing of Gad (Further, Verse 20.) his companion [under the same standard] (Numbers 2:10-14.) Moses mentioned this subject. This interpretation is likely [to be true]. But the first one appears to me to be more correct, for Moses’ blessing corresponds to the manner and thought that Jacob mentioned. And by way of the Truth, [the mystic teachings of the Cabala], the expression Let [Reuben] live and not die is associated with visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children (Exodus 20:5 (see Vol. II, p. 300, and Notes 361-362).) and there I alluded to its secret. (Exodus 20:5 (see Vol. II, p. 300, and Notes 361-362).) Moses’ blessing helped Reuben gain atonement for the affair of Bilhah, that he not be cut off and be denied [the World to Come] for it, forever. However, He visited upon him, along with the rest of the tribes [the sin of] the sale of Joseph, according to the narrative in Pirkei Heichaloth. (“Chapters of the Palaces.” — Heichaloth Rabboth, 6. A reference to this work is also found in Ramban’s Introduction to the Commentary on the Torah (see Vol. I, p. 10, Note 22). This is a mystic Midrash describing the process of ascending to heaven and of the palaces therein leading up to the Holy Throne. The principal narrator in this account is Rabbi Yishmael, one of the martyrs who was executed during the religious persecutions of Hadrian. The Midrash mentions the executions on account of the tradition that the ten martyrs suffered their fate in order to atone for the sale of Joseph by ten of his brothers.)

SIMEON AND LEVI ARE BRETHREN. Jacob is saying that they possess the attribute of kinship for their hearts were inflamed concerning their sister. (Ibid., 34:25-26.) He is thus stating in their defense that they acted as they did out of their brotherly zeal, thus suggesting [that were it not for this extenuating circumstance], they would have been deserving of great punishment and their sin would have been unforgivable since what they did to the people of Shechem was an act of violence. The correct interpretation appears to me to be that he is saying that Simeon and Levi are real brothers, uniting in fraternity and brotherhood in counsel and deed. Now I have already explained (Ibid., 34:13.) that Jacob was angry with Simeon and Levi for having committed violence when they killed the people of the city of Shechem, for they (The people of the city committed no wrong. It was Shechem who violated Dinah, and the people were not in a position to protest his action.) had not sinned against them at all. They even made a covenant with them and they were circumcised, thus being enabled to return to G-d and become included within the people of the household of Abraham, part of the souls that they had gotten in Haran. (Above, 12:5. A reference to the proselytes whom Abraham and Sarah had brought “beneath the sheltering wings of the Shechina” (Rashi, ibid.)) Jacob was additionally angry with them lest people say that the matter was done at his suggestion, thus creating a profaning of G-d’s Name, as people will say that the prophet has committed violence and plunder. This is the intent of the verse, Let my soul not come into their council— (Verse 6 here.) this is an excuse for he was not in their council when they answered the people of Shechem with subtlety, (Above, 34:13.) and he was not united in their assembly when they came upon the people of the city and killed them. It was for this reason that he cursed their anger and wrath. (Verse 7 here.) And so did Onkelos translate: “My soul was not in their council when they assembled to strike, etc.”

INSTRUMENTS OF VIOLENCE ‘M’CHEIROTHEIHEM.’ According to Onkelos and all commentators, (Rashi and R’dak.) the meaning of the verse is as if it were written: instruments of violence ‘m’garotheihem’ (in their sojournings). This is similar to the verses: Thy sojourning (‘m’chorothayich’) and thy nativity, (Ezekiel 16:3. There too m’chorothayich is as if it were written m’gorothayich.) into the land of their sojourn (‘m’churatham’). (Ibid., 29:14.) Thus the commentators said that the meaning of the verse is that they did violence in the land of their sojourn. (That is, the people lived with them in peace, and they did not act accordingly.) Now if so, the approximate sense of the verse is as follows: “They had instruments of violence in the land of their sojournings,” it being referred to as “the land of their sojournings” since they lived there afterwards. (At the time when Simeon and Levi wrought punishment upon the city of Shechem, they had just entered the land. How then could Jacob refer to the event as having taken place in the land of their sojourning? Ramban answers that this is a reference to the future.) But in my opinion Jacob is saying that “the instruments of violence are their dwelling places,” i.e., the essence of their lives, even as the expression, the days of my pilgrimage (‘m’gurai’). (See above, 47:9.) He is thus saying that the very instruments of violence are their dwelling places for they live and sustain themselves by them. A similar expression is found in the verse: The desert yieldeth them bread for their children. (Job 24:5. The word “yieldeth” is not in the Hebrew text. Ramban interprets the meaning of the verse as follows: “The desert is to him bread for his children,” for there he has the opportunity to rob and plunder. Similarly, the verse here says that the sword is their livelihood. Ramban’s interpretation of the above verse in the book of Job is also found in his commentary to that book. See Kitvei Haramban, I, p. 80.) And it is on account of this that their father divided them in Jacob (Verse 7 here.) so that they should not unite and scattered them in Israel so that they should not assemble. This was indeed so, for Simeon’s inheritance in the Land was contained in the inheritance of the children of Judah, as it is written, And their inheritance was in the midst of the inheritance of the children of Judah, (Joshua 19:1.) with the cities of Simeon set apart from one another throughout the entire tribe of Judah. And Levi’s inheritance consisted of the Cities of Refuge, (See Numbers 35:1-8.) which were scattered through all Israel. (See Joshua, Chapter 21.)

FOR IN THEIR ANGER THEY SLEW A MAN AND IN THEIR SELF-WILL THEY DISABLED AN OX (‘SHOR’). The meaning of this is that they committed violence in their wrath in that they were angry at Shechem, and it was to satisfy their own desire and not because of the guilt or sins of the slain. Now Onkelos says that the word shor (ox) should be understood as shur (wall) with a shuruk, (The phonetic equivalent oo. Thus the word should be understood as shur (wall) rather than shor (ox). The Torah-script has no vowel signs, and for the sake of interpretation, a difficult word may sometimes be interpreted as if it were vowelled differently than the traditional reading.) as in the verse, Daughters treaded on the wall (‘shur’). (Verse 22 here.) Thus Onkelos translated the word shor in the present verse as “the wall of the enemy,” similar in expression to the verse: Mine eye also hath gazed on them that lie in wait for me (‘b’shuroi’). (Psalms 92:12. Ramban is thus suggesting that the enemy lies in wait for me behind his fortified walls.) The meaning of the verse is thus: “and they uprooted a city surrounded with a wall, slaying their children and women after having killed the men of the city.” The word ikru (disabled) would then be similar in use to the verse, Ekron shall be rooted up (‘tei’akeir’). (Zephaniah 2:4.) Others (Mentioned in the commentary of R’dak in the name of Rabbi Yaakov the son of Rabbi Elazar.) have explained that the ox, which is the largest of cattle, is an allusion to Hamor and his son Shechem, the prince of the country, (Above, 34:2.) just as in the verses: His firstling bull, majesty is his; (Deuteronomy 33:17.) Ye kine of Bashan, that are in the mountain of Samaria. (Amos 4:1.) Similarly do the verses surname the great princes “rams” (Exodus 15:15. Eilei Moab is generally translated, “the mighty men of Moab,” but literally it means “the rams of Moab.”) and “he-goats.” (Isaiah 14:9. Atudei eretz is generally translated, “the chief ones of the earth,” but literally it means “the he-goats of the earth.”) The correct interpretation appears to me to be that the verse is to be understood in its usual sense as stating that in their anger they killed each man of whom they were wrathful; and in their self-will, after their anger had been calmed by the slaying of the men, they uprooted all oxen, this being an allusion to their cattle and their possessions, including everything that was in the home and everything in the field. Now Jacob mentioned this in order to state that he had no part in all these secret deliberations of theirs, even in the removal of the cattle and possessions, or any aspect of the spoiling and plundering of the people of the city of Shechem. The word ikru [in the expression, ikru shor], has the same meaning as in the verse: Thou shalt hemstring (‘te’akeir’) their horses. (Joshua 11:6.) But the expression and purport is all one.

but his brothers did not have many sons and all their family did not multiply as much as the children of Judah They did not have as many children as the children of Judah. Since they were few, and Judah’s territory was too large for them, Judah accepted Simeon in its territory, because Simeon had no share in the land of Israel, as it says (Gen. 49:7): “I shall divide them in Jacob and scatter them in Israel,” and we learned in Genesis Rabbah (Shittah Hadashah): “I shall divide them among the Children of Israel to station scribes in Israel in the synagogues, etc.” Now how do we know that they agreed [to give them a share of their territory]? For it is written (Jos. 19:9): “Out of the lot of the children of Judah was the inheritance of the children of Simeon, for the portion of the children of Judah was too large for them; therefore the children of Simeon inherited in the midst of their inheritance,” lest the beasts of the field outnumber them. Now as regards the verse (ibid. v. 1): “And the second lot came out to Simeon,” this is what happened: They cast lots to choose which tribe would accept Simeon in its territory, and the lot fell upon the territory of Judah. And the meaning of the verse (Jud. 1:3): “And Judah said to Simeon his brother: Come up with me into my lot, and we will fight against the Canaanites, and I will also go with you into your lot,” refers to “the lot I have given you.”

מה אקב ולא קבה אל HOW SHALL I CURSE WHOM GOD HATH NOT CURSED — Even when they deserved to be cursed, they were not cursed. When their ancestor, Jacob, made mention of their sin — (Genesis 49:6) “For in their anger they slew a man” — he cursed their anger only, as it is said, (Genesis 49:7) “Cursed be their anger”. When their ancestor, Jacob, went to his father with deceit he deserved to be cursed, but what is stated there (Genesis 27:33)? “Yea, he shall be blessed”. In the case of those tribes who had to recite the blessings it is said, (Deuteronomy 27:12) “These shall stand to bless the people”, but in the case of those who had to pronounce the curses it does not state, “And these shall stand to curse the people”, but, “And these shall stand for the curse”, — it does not wish to mention the term “cursing” in direct reference to them (the people) (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 1; Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 12).

לרב תרבה נחלתו, a reference to the amount of land, for although the land was being divided 12 tribes in shares of equal value in terms of money, the size of the allocations varied according to the quality of the soil each tribe received. A tribe who numbered many souls received a quantitatively larger piece of real estate as is spelled out here by the words לרב תרבו נחלתו, “you shall give a larger inheritance to the numerically superior tribe.” This is the reason why Menashe and Ephrayim received 2 separate territories seeing that their father Joseph had been a firstborn and treated as such in Yaakov’s final blessing, they were entitled to two such shares. (Genesis 48,22) This is also the way we must understand Chronicles I 5,1 ובחללו יצועי אביו ניתנה בכורתו ליוסף בן ישראל, “and when he defiled the bed of his father his birthright was given to Joseph, son of Yisrael.” Shimon, who numbered fewer people than any other tribe at this count, received a relatively small parcel of land, which itself was an enclave within the territory allocated to the tribe of Yehudah. (compare Joshua 19,9 on this subject) This also was the fulfillment of Yaakov’s wish in Genesis 49,7 “I will divide both Levi and Shimon among the tribes of Israel.”

Simeon and Levi are a pair; Their weapons are tools of lawlessness. Let me not be included in their council, Let me not be counted in their assembly. For when angry, they slay men, And when it pleased them, they maimed the bull. Cursed be their anger so fierce, And their wrath so relentless. I will divide them in Jacob, Scatter them in Israel. Genesis 49:5–7

“And of Levi he said” (Deuteronomy 33:8) – Why is this said? Because Simeon and Levi drank from the same cup, as it was said, “Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce, and their wrath, for it was cruel. I will divide them in Jacob, I will scatter them in Israel” (Genesis 49:7). A parable: Two men borrowed money from the king. One repaid the king and even lent him some money, while the other not only did not repay the debt but even borrowed more money. So it was that both Simeon and Levi “borrowed” in the matter of Shechem, (“The two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, the brothers of Dinah – took each man his sword and came upon the city stealthily, and killed all of the males” (Genesis 34:25).) but Levi repaid his debt in the wilderness (“Moses stood in the gate of the camp and said, ‘Whoever is for the Lord, let him come to me.’ And all the sons of Levi gathered to him. And he said to them, ‘Thus says the Lord, God of Israel: Let every man gird his thigh… ’ And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses” (Exodus 32:26–28).) and even “lent” something to God at Shittim. (“Phineas son of Elazar son of Aaron the priest has turned My wrath away from the Children of Israel… ” (Numbers 25:11).) But Simeon not only did not repay his “debt” but even “borrowed” more, in the matter of Zimri. (Numbers 25:14.) Thus Levi was blessed, but not Simeon. Sifrei, Deuteronomy 349 (Also Midrash Tannaim 33:8.)

Cursed be their anger so fierce, and their wrath so relentless; I shall divide them among Jacob; I shall scatter them in Israel. Genesis 49:7

יחי ראובן, “May Reuven live, etc.” Nachmanides, quoting Ibn Ezra, writes that the reason that Moses commenced the blessings with Reuven was because he was Yaakov’s biological firstborn, and that the reason why Moses did not include Shimon in the list of tribes whom he blessed was because that tribe had been so guilty in the sin at Baal Peor. In fact, most of the people that sinned there were from the tribe of Shimon, something that can be proved by comparing the tremendous reduction in the number of men over 20 during the second census compared to that in the first census. The reason was that the sinners died during the plague before Pinchas had stabbed Zimri and Cosbi to death. Nachmanides adds that in his view this is not conclusive proof of anything, as even after deducting the 24000 men who had died during that plague, and assuming even that all of them had belonged to the tribe of Shimon there are still 13000 missing men from Shimon unaccounted for. (at the first census there had been 59,300 men of the required ages from the tribe of Shimon, whereas after the sin of Baal Pe’or there were only Moreover, we observe that there was substantial shrinkage in the number of men of recruiting age among some of the other tribes also, The tribe of Gad numbered 45,500 such men during the first count, whereas now it had only The number of men counted from the tribe of Ephrayim during the second count was also 5000 fewer than when they had been counted during the first census. Besides, when the Torah reports (Numbers 25,3) that Israel became attached to Baal Pe’or and that G’d told Moses “to take (gather) the leaders of the nation and hang them before Hashem, etc.,” it is clear from this verse that members of all tribes had been involved in sinning at Baal Pe’or. The fact that Zimri was the one whom Pinchas killed is no proof, as he was only the head of a בית אב, and not the prince of the tribe. The tribe of Shimon had a number of heads of families with that title. Moreover the rebels from the tribe of Reuven, Datan and Aviram, who went into the bowels of the earth with Korach were of higher rank in their tribe than Zimri was in his, and Moses did not deny the tribe of Reuven a blessing on that account. It is quite inconceivable that Moses would deny a whole tribe a blessing on account of a sin committed by one of their leading members. The Torah (Moses’ words) expressly stated that all the people who had not sinned on the occasion of the debacle of Baal Pe’or were included in the complimentואתם הדבקים בה' אלוקיכם חיים כולכם היום, “all of you who have cleaved to the Lord your G’d are alive as of this day.” In other words, Moses faced only righteous people at the time when he set out to bless the nation. The correct interpretation of why Moses did not bless the tribe of Shimon specifically has to do with the long-standing tradition that the Jewish people comprise no more than 12 tribes. At the time when Yaakov had blessed his children, he had given one blessing to Joseph, although part of the whole procedure had been the vision that both of Joseph’s sons would develop into two separate tribes. This left Moses with the problem of which tribe to delete from his blessings, seeing that including the “super” tribe Levi, there were now in effect 13 tribes. The division of the tribe of Joseph into two tribes did not occur as a mere wish of Yaakov, or as its interpretation by Moses on his own. At the inauguration of the Tabernacle and when establishing the groupings around the Tabernacle by the various tribes, Ephrayim and Menashe, by Divine decree, had clearly been treated as separate tribes. Furthermore, there was a need to mention Joshua who would be Moses’ successor and who would lead the people to the Divinely ordained heritage in the Land of Canaan, and he was a member of the tribe of Ephrayim. Seeing that Ephrayim was the junior of the two sons of Joseph, it would have been inconceivable for Moses to ignore the senior son (tribe) Menashe by not blessing that tribe separately. Moses, clearly, wanted to bless the tribe of Levi, the tribe whose members henceforth would dispense blessings to all of the people. The people’s various sacrificial offerings would have been meaningless unless the Priests, members of the tribe of Levi had blessed them. Moses could not avoid deleting one tribe from his blessing as the number 12 was not arbitrary but was symbolical of the 12 signs of the zodiac, the twelve months of the year, etc. According to the Midrash these twelve constellations in the sky known as the zodiacal constellations, are considered the arms of the universe, G’d’s instruments in supervising nature at work. When the people were blessed at Mount Gerizim and Mount Eyval, the tribe of Shimon most certainly took part in that procedure (Deut.) On that occasion the tribe of Levi was not mentioned, as its members did not share in the distribution of ancestral land. Yaakov, on his deathbed had indicated that he wished both the tribe of Shimon and that of Levi to be separated from one another in order to forestall the kind of violence plotted against the city of Shechem by these two brothers to ever occur again. (Compare Genesis 49,7) The entire portion of וזאת הברכה had, of course, been said by Moses while he was inspired with the Holy Spirit, and the reason why Reuven had been listed first was because he was the first of the tribes to receive his ancestral heritage (on the east bank of the Jordan). An additional reason was the fact that he was chronologically the most senior of the tribes, the founding father having been Yaakov’s oldest son, the firstborn. Moses prayed for the tribe’s continued well being, wishing that its name not be extinguished on account of the sin of their founding father involving an indiscretion with Bilhah, his father’s steady mate after the death of Rachel. To underscore this point, Moses referred to the fact that Reuven was the firstborn, something that everybody had been well aware of. He blessed Yehudah next, as this tribe would be the first tribe to receive its heritage in the land, and he would lead the nation in its war against the Canaanites. The blessing given by Moses to Yehudah was meant to include all of the Jewish people. Moses blessed the tribe of Levi next, as the Levites who largely lived in Jerusalem, would be territorial neighbours to Yehudah. They would ensure that the sacrificial offerings of the Jewish people, both communally and individually, would enjoy a welcome reception by Hashem. Binyamin was next in line for Moses’ blessing, as the holy Temple would stand on its territory. After having blessed Binyamin, Moses blessed the tribes named after Joseph’s two sons, as they were next in conquering and settling the land of Israel. Next Moses blessed the remaining tribes that had as their founding father sons of Yaakov principal wife Leah. He followed the pattern used by Yaakov when he had blessed those sons. This left the tribes whose founding fathers were the maidservants of Leah and Rachel, respectively. History shows that the lots allocating lands to the various tribes also confirmed the order in which Moses had blessed these tribes. Gad was mentioned first, as he with Reuven was the first to receive his share on the east bank of the Jordan. He was also part of the flag commanded by the army headed by Reuven.

Rebbi Onias said, Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba raised a difficulty: If he wanted to deflect him to another subject (If R. Joshua’s intention only was to deflect R. Ismael’s inquiry there were many other questions to be asked.) , he should have removed him to the five indeterminate places in the Torah (In the absence of masoretic accents it may be difficult to parse a sentence. In Babli sources, this is called “verses that have no decision,” i. e., where to place the caesura. In our masoretic texts only Ex. 25:34 remains undecided in this sense. Parallel sources are Babli Yoma52a/b, Gen. rabba80(5) (Theodor-Albeck #957/958, Sokoloff Geniza Fragments p. 170), Midrash Cant. 1(18), Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Amaleq1, Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Iohai Epstein-Melamed p. 121, Tanḥuma Bešallaḥ26.The list itself is attributed in most sources to Issy ben Jehudah. [A discussion in principle about this subject is found in ש. קוגוט, המקרא בין טעמים לפרשנות, י־ם תשנד; מ. ברויאר, מקראות שאין להם הכרע, לשוננו נח (תשנה) 189־199.]) , which are the following: “gift, cursed, tomorrow, almond shaped, rise”. Behold if you choose well the gift or the gift if you do not choose well (Gen.4:7. They must have read הֲלוֹא אִם־תֵּיטִ֔יב שְׂאֵ֕ת וְאִם֙ לֹא תֵיטִ֔יב but also in the masoretic text הֲלוֹא אִם־תֵּיטִיב֙ שְׂאֵ֔ת there is a stop between תֵּיטִיב֙ and שְׂאֵ֔ת.) . For in their rage they killed a man and by their will castrated a cursed ox or cursed be their rage for it is strong (Gen.49:6–7. It is a question whether to read one or two sentences.) . Moses said to Joshua . . go fight Amaleq tomorrow or tomorrow I shall stand on top of the hill (Ex. 17:9.) . On the candelabra four cups almond shaped or almond shaped their knobs and their flowers (Ex. 25:34.) .The Eternal said to Moses, you will lie with your fathers and rise or rise will this people and whore (Deut. 31:16.) . Rebbi Tanḥuma added the following: Jacob’s sons came from the field when they heard or when they heard the men were offended (Gen. 34:7. Most translations follow the masoretic punctuation in choosing the first alternative but the German translation by Torczyner et al. (Berlin 1934) which opts for the second.) . Rebbi La said, there are things about which one kisses the mouth, as it is said, may he kiss me with the kisses of his mouth (This answers R. Ḥama bar Uqba’s question. The verse Cant. 1:2 was chosen because its first part, quoted now, tells R. Ismael to be silent since a person who is kissed on his mouth cannot speak at that time. The first part clearly refers to a male; nevertheless R. Ismael had a point reading the second part as addressing a female since the sentence switches from third to second person, possibly indicating a change of speaker.) . Rebbi Isaac said, and me did the Eternal command (Deut. 4:14. Here starts a rather defective Genizah fragment (Ginzberg pp. 276–277.)) . “Me, and me.” Things were said to me that were said to you. And things were said to me alone (Not everything has to be told to everybody.) .

It also happened that King Ptolemy assembled seventy-two elders and placed them in seventy-two [separate] rooms without telling them the reason for which he had assembled them. He then went to each one of them and said to him, (lit. ‘to them’.) ‘Write for me [a translation of] the Torah of Moses your master’. The Omnipresent inspired them (lit. ‘put counsel in the heart of each one of them’.) and the mind of all of them was identical, so that each on his own (So GRA.) wrote the [same translation of the] Torah, introducing [the same] thirteen alterations (Deviations from the traditional text. In the extant Versions of the Septuagint only some of these are found.) as follows: ‘God created in the beginning’. (Instead of In the beginning God created (Gen. 1, 1) the Heb. of which might be misinterpreted to mean that a power named ‘Bereshith’ (in the beginning) created God.) ‘And God said I shall make a man in image and likeness.’ (The Heb. text reads: Let us make man in our image, after our likeness (Gen. 1, 26). The plural us and our might erroneously suggest a plurality of deities.) ‘And He finished on the sixth [day] and rested on the seventh [day].’ (For the Heb.: And He finished on the seventh day (Gen. 2, 2) which could be understood to imply that God did some work on the seventh day.) ‘Male and female He created him.’ (Instead of created them (ibid. V, 2) from which it might be inferred that man and woman were, from the first, two separate beings, contrary to ibid. II, 21.) ‘Come let Me go down and there confound their language.’ (Instead of let us go down (ibid. XI, 7).) ‘And Sarah laughed among her relatives, (i.e. she laughed in the presence of people and therefore incurred censure (ibid. XVIII, 12). The Heb. means ‘within herself’ as Abraham had done when he laughed … in his heart (ibid. XVII, 17) and had not been rebuked.) saying.’ ‘For in their anger they slew oxen (So GRA, H and M. V incorrectly ‘a man’.) and in their self-will they digged up a stall.’ (Changing men (ibid. XLIX, 6) to ‘oxen’ and oxen to ‘stall’ in order to remove the stigma of murder from Jacob’s sons.) ‘And Moses took his wife and his children and set them upon a carrier (So M. V and H read ‘carriers of men’.) of men.’ (i.e. an animal conformable with the dignity of Moses, instead of ass (Ex. 4, 20).) ‘Now the time that the children of Israel dwelt in Egypt and in the land of Canaan and in other lands (So M. V omits ‘and in other lands’. [The reading of the Septuagint is ‘in the land of Canaan and in the land of Egypt’.]) was four hundred and thirty years.’ (Instead of the Heb. which omits ‘in the land of Canaan and in other lands’ (Ex. 12, 40), and implies that all the 430 years were spent in Egypt when, in fact, they could not have dwelt there more than 210 years (cf. Rashi to Meg. 9a).) ‘And he sent the elect of the children of Israel.’ (So GRA and Meg. 9a but omitted in V. ‘Elect’ is substituted for young men (ibid. XXIV, 5), the former being regarded as more suitable persons for the service.) ‘And upon the elect of the children of Israel He laid not His hand.’ (Here also ‘elect’ was substituted for the Heb. for nobles (ibid. 11). The alteration was not essential, but ‘elect’ which was mentioned earlier was preferred. It should be noted that in the total of thirteen alterations, this and the preceding are counted as one.) ‘I have not taken one desirable thing (A ‘desirable thing’ [which occurs in the Septuagint] for the Heb. ass (Num. 16, 15) to avoid the suggestion that Moses did not take an ass but more precious objects.) from them.’ ‘The [beast] with small legs.’ (Instead of the Heb. for the hare (Lev. 11, 6) which is arnebeth, so as not to give offence to Ptolemy the name of whose queen was Arnebeth.) ‘Which the Lord thy God hath allotted to give light unto all the peoples under the whole heaven.’ (The insertion ‘to give light’ (Deut. 4, 19) removes the possible misunderstanding that the heavenly bodies enumerated in the verse were intended by God to be objects of worship.) ‘Which I commanded should not be served.’ (Deut. 17, 3 reads which I have commanded not. This might be taken to mean that God did not desire their existence and their creation was consequently due to a power beyond His control. It should be noted that the last two alterations are regarded as one in the enumeration because both deal with heavenly bodies as objects of worship.)

The fourth case is the term: “Arur” (Genesis 49:7). This verse can be read: “Cursed [arur] be their anger for it was fierce, and their wrath for it was cruel,” on account of Levi and Simeon’s treatment of Shechem. Alternatively, this term, which appears at the beginning of the verse, can be read as the last word of the previous verse: “And in their anger they cut off cursed [arur] oxen” (Genesis 49:6–7). According to this interpretation, “cursed oxen” is referring to the oxen of Shechem, who descended from the accursed Canaan.

Cursed be their anger for it is powerful, and their fury for it is cruel. I will divid them throughout Yaakov and scatter them throughout [the land of] Israel.

Accursed was the town of Shekem when Shimeon and Levi entered to destroy it in their wrath, for it was strong, and in their anger, for it was cruel. And Jakob our father said, If these remain together, no people or kingdom can stand before them. I will divide the tribe of Shimeon, that they may become preachers and teachers of the law in the congregation of Jakob; and I will disperse the tribe of Levi in the houses of instruction for the sons of Israel

And Jakob said, Accursed was the town of Shekem, when they entered within it to destroy it in their violent wrath; and their hatred against Joseph, for it was relentless. If, said Jakob, they dwell together, no king nor ruler may stand before them. Therefore will I divide the inheritance of the sons of Shimeon into two portions; one part shall come to them out of the inheritance of the sons of Jehuda, and one part from among the rest of the tribes of Jakob; and the tribe of Levi I will disperse among all the tribes of Israel.

Genesis 49,8. “You, o Yehudah, your brothers shall ‎praise;” The word ‎אתה‎ at the beginning of this verse poses a ‎problem. Our author directs the reader to look at Kings I 18,36-37 ‎where the prophet Elijah repeatedly prefaces part of his prayer by ‎addressing G’d in direct speech, i.e. with the word ‎אתה‎, “You.” ‎The whole idea of a creature addressing the King of the universe ‎with the word ‎אתה‎ “YOU,” as we do in our daily prayers, i.e. ‎ברוך ‏אתה ה' וגו'‏‎, is hard to understand for us who would not dare to ‎address a mortal king in such familiar, almost insulting language. ‎

יהודה אתה יודוו אחיך, as to Yehudah, “your brothers will acknowledge you (as leader);” we have a play on words here, using Yehudah’s name as synonymous with the owner’s position amongst this brothers. The word יודרך, is equivalent to ישבחוך ויכבדוך, “they will praise you and honour you.” This will happen when they see you subduing your enemies, i.e. ידך בעורף אויביך, ”your hand will be around the neck of your enemies.” When this happens, they will prostrate themselves before you.

יהודה, אתה יודוך אחיך, “Yehudah your brothers will agree to your becoming king;” (your father’s sons will prostrate themselves before you [end of the sentence] (B’reshit Rabbah 99,8) We find this prediction having come true in the time of King David.. The numerical value of the letters in the word “Yehudah,” equals 30, corresponding to the 30 qualities required of a person who is fit to become Royalty. (Ethics of our fathers, 6,6) The thirty qualities (virtues, and privileges accorded) referred to have been enumerated in the Talmud tractate Sanhedrin, folio 18. An alternate interpretation of the words: יודוך אחיך: all the Israelites collectively, not only the members of his tribe will become known as יהודים, “Jews,” derived from his name Yehudah. (B’reshit Rabbah 98,6) Not only this, but the Messiah, the king of the Israelites after the final redemption will be descended from him.

JUDAH. Thou art as thy name, (That is, thy name Judah means praise.) and thy brethren shall so praise thee. (The verse literally reads: Judah thou, thy brethren shall praise thee. I.E interprets thus: Judah thou art as thy name and thy brethren shall so praise thee.) When thy brothers shall see that Thy hand shall be on the neck of thine enemies; Thy father’s sons shall bow down before thee as to a king. This prophecy came to pass.

יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך, "Yehudah- as to you, your brothers will praise you, etc." Why did Jacob have to add the word אתה when he addressed Yehudah? Apparently the word was meant to exclude someone else. Besides, why did Jacob not say: וידך, "and your hand, etc," instead of simply: ידך, "your hand?" The same applies to the missing conjunctive letter ו in front of ישתחוו לך.

It appears that Jacob's intention was to assure Yehudah that contrary to the blessings for the other brothers which were predictions for the distant future after Israel would take possession of the land of Canaan, Yehudah himself would already experience the esteem of his brothers. We have confirmation of this in Chronicles I 5,2 where we read: "for Yehudah became more powerful than his brothers and a leader came from him." At the appropriate time, Yehudah's hand would be at the neck of his enemies. At that time his brothers would prostrate themselves before him and he would become their king. This prophecy was fulfilled during the reign of Saul when David won great victories and the Jewish people crowned him king.

יודוך אחיך, “your brothers will acknowledge you.” According to the plain meaning of the text this is a reference to the Israelites eventually acclaiming David, a descendant of Yehudah as their king. ישתחוו לך בני אביך, “the sons of your father will prostrate themselves before you.” He did not say: “the sons of your mother.” There was no need for him to say that Leah’s sons would acknowledge Yehudah as their leader. The point Yaakov made was that even the sons of his other wives would also acknowledge him as their leader. Yaakov referred to Yehudah (verse 9) as גור אריה instead of as אריה, a fully grown lion. He added the word גור seeing Yehudah had still been a child (less than 20 years old when the brothers first deferred to him). He called him אריה on account of his physical power which [paralleled that of the lion, the king of the beasts. He is also called גבור, to reflect Proverbs 30,30 “the lion is the mightiest of the beasts and recoils before none.” Yehudah is described in similar terms in Chronicles I 5,2.

יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך, they will elevate you to the position of royalty instead of Reuven, for the royalty, or potential for royalty of which I have deprived him your brothers will bestow upon you. We have proof of this happening from Samuel II 5,1 when David was crowned in Chevron by all the tribes of Israel. We are told in Bereshit Rabbah 99,8 that when Yehudah saw that Yaakov suddenly served up Reuven’s sin, as well as that of his brother Shimon and Levi, he became afraid that his own sin with Tamar would be the next one to be referred to by his father. He only calmed down when Yaakov began his remarks to Yehudah with the words “your brothers will elevate you to the position of royalty because you had the strength of character to publicly acknowledge and repent your having slept with your daughter-in-law Tamar.”

ידך בעורף אויביך, a reference to King David, who was victorious in all his wars against his enemies. We have a parallel verse said by David himself in Samuel II 22,41 ואויבי תחת לי עורף, “He made my enemies turn tail before me.”

ישתחוו לך בני אביך, when they will observe that you are successful, then they will prostrate themselves before you and declare that you are fit to be their king. When Yitzchok blessed Yaakov in Genesis 27,29 he referred to “the sons of your mother” prostrating themselves before him. Seeing that Yitzchok had only one wife this was quite normal. Seeing that Yaakov had four wives it would not have been good enough to refer to the sons of Yehudah’s mother, as that would have included only half the tribes. By phrasing the blessing as applicable to the “sons of your father,” Yaakov included all 12 tribes.

יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך, anyone who interprets these words to mean that the brothers ought to praise Yehudah is grossly mistaken. The reason that Yaakov transfers the status of leader of the brothers, and, ultimately, hereditary royalty to Yehudah, was not his excellence as much as his older brothers’ unfitness. Yehudah’s elevation to this status would be initiated by his own brothers by their own volition, not through his father imposing him on the rest of the brothers. (compare the end of our verse “and the sons of your father will prostrate themselves before you.”) In Numbers 26,20 when Moses appoints Joshua as his successor, G’d suggests that he on his own account transfer his mantle of leadership to Joshua, [although G’d could have removed it from Moses and then Himself have bestowed it on Joshua. Ed.]

יודוך, they will crown you. The word is abbreviated in its spelling, being the equivalent of יהודוך, (as in Psalms 45,18) Similar constructions [a letter being omitted, Ed.] are found in Kings II 6,27 where we have יושיעך instead of יהושיעך). The latter and proper spelling is found in Samuel I 17,47 i.e. יחושיע. At any rate, even though the word יודוך is derived from הוד as in הוד מלכות, “regal majesty,” the letter י is not an integral part of the word, but is added as part of the constructions known as חטופי פ'ה, the first root letter in roots commencing with the letter ה being shortened in sound. When we encounter to word הוציא, a transitive past construction derived from the root יצא, the first root letter of יצא has actually been omitted, the letterה in הוציא not being part of the root, but substituting for the letter י of the root. The same is true of the root ישב and the transitive construction of that verb as הושיב. We encounter the same phenomenon in Exodus 15,5 where the Torah wrote ירה בים. In our case the root of יודך is הרה. [The author quotes more examples of this kind, which I think we can skip. Ed.]

וישתחוו, in order to enthrone you.

בני אביך, Yaakov chose this formulation because having had four wives it was the simplest way. On the other hand, when Yitzchok (who had only one wife) blessed Yaakov, he spoke of בני אמך, “the sons of your mother” (27,29)

יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך THOU JUDAH, THY BRETHREN SHALL PRAISE THEE — Because he rebuked the first three tribes in harsh terms Judah began to move away that he (Jacob) should not censure him for the incident with Tamar; Jacob therefore recalled him with words that would soothe him: Judah, you are not like these! — you your brethren may indeed praise (Genesis Rabbah 99:5).

ידך בערף איביך THY HAND IS ON THE NECK OF THINE ENEMIES — a prophecy fulfilled in the days of David, a descendant of Judah, who said (2 Samuel 22:41) “Thou hast also made mine enemies turn their back unto me” (Genesis Rabbah 99:8). (The Hebrew may signify, “Thou hast given me my enemies’ necks”)

בני אביך THY FATHER’S CHILDREN — Because they were born of different wives he did not say “thy mother’s children” as Isaac said (Genesis Rabbah 99:8). (He meant: all thy brothers will bow down to thee. Had he said “thy mother’s children”, he would have included only Judah’s brothers who were born of the same mother as himself.)

Indem Jakob seine Söhne mustert, um den zum Führer Tüchtigen zu finden und er bereits Reuben, Schimeon und Lewi für diese Führerschaft untauglich gefunden, ruht endlich sein Blick auf Juda mit dem Ausspruch: Du bists, du bist der Berufene, du vereinigst die erforderlichen Eigenschaften, die Reuben einerseits, Schimeon und Lewi andererseits nach entgegengesetzten Seiten hin fehlen; ידך בערף אויביך: nicht erst dein Schwert, deine natürliche Macht sitzt in dem Nacken deiner Feinde, du begehst keinen Mord, du brauchst keine כלי חמס deinen Feinden gegenüber. Die Entfaltung deiner natürlichen Macht wird so achtunggebietend sein, daß deine Feinde dir den Rücken kehren, dich nicht anzugreifen wagen und froh sind, wenn du sie in Ruhe läßest. Und nach innen wirst du in solcher edlen Überlegenheit dastehen, daß deine Brüder sich dir freiwillig unterordnen.

יהודה אתה, “you are the one who is fit to fill the position of royalty. The reason is that you are not stained with fatal flaws which would disqualify you from becoming king.

יודוך אחיך, your brothers will accept you as king as they admit that you are fit to rule.

ידך בעורף אויביך, so that they will flee from you so that you do not destroy them. We find a similar construction in Exodus 23,27 ונתתי את כל אויביך אליך עורף, “I will make all your enemies turn their backs on you.”

וישתחוו לך בני אביך; you will rule over all your brothers (fellow tribes), but not over all the other nations,

In the days of Dovid... [Rashi knows this] because Yaakov should have blessed Yehudah with, “You shall rule over nations,” or, “You shall be king.” Why did he say, “Your hand will be on the neck...”? To allude to Dovid. (Maharshal)

The Sages state that when Judah heard Jacob’s harsh comments to his three older brothers, he was concerned that his father would rebuke him as well, 18 as he too had sinned in the past. Indeed, he began to retreat in hesitation, but his father called him back: Judah, not only are you not inferior to the others, but you, your brothers shall acknowledge you and give you honor; since your hand shall be at the neck of your enemies, as you will subjugate them. In addition, your father’s sons shall prostrate themselves to you, for you will rule over your brothers.

יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך, “as far as you, Yehudah are concerned, your brothers will have to admit to you, etc.” They will acknowledge you as already foretold in your very name, for they will realize that your hand will vanquish the neck of your enemies thereby saving them.

“Judah, your brothers will praise” [49:8]. Judah saw that Jacob was denigrating his children, so he stood in back and did not want to show himself to Jacob. Jacob said to Judah: you are not like this; your brothers will praise you. (Rashi, Genesis, 49:8.)

“Your hand will be on the nape of your foes” [49:8]. Your hand shall be on the nape of your enemies. That is, you will win your wars and your enemies will flee before you and will show their nape and their back. All of your brothers will bow down to you. (Hizkuni, Genesis, 49:8.)

“Your father’s sons” [49:8]. Since Jacob had many wives and had children with each of them, therefore he says, all of your father’s children will bow down to you. That is to say, even though they are not your brothers from the same mother. (Rashi, Genesis, 49:8.)

Some problems in the text of our story: 1) Since the brothers were all superior people who would neither ruin their father's old age nor heap guilt upon themselves, why did they treat Joseph as they did? This is especially puzzling since we know from Gittin 52, that dreams as a way of foretelling future events may be discounted, disregarded even? 2) Since the brothers appear to have feared that Joseph would rule over them, why did they reverse their intention and allowed Joseph to live? Surely this kept the chance of his dreams coming true alive? 3) Why did the brothers have to resort to subterfuge to get rid of Joseph? Why did they not simply kill him and bury him? Why did they so readily consent to changes in plan, such as Reuben's suggestion to throw him into the pit, and Yehudah's suggestion to sell him to the caravan of Midianites? From their entire behavior, it seems they wanted to avoid bloodshed and were only afraid of what Joseph could do to them if he remained alive and free at the same time. 4) Why did the Torah not report explicitly how the brothers were punished for their treatment of Joseph? In fact, it appears that they had heavenly assistance in carrying out their plan (Bereshit Rabbah 84). They appear to have been beneficiaries of their misdeed, getting the V.I.P. treatment in Egypt during the famine in later years, ensuring their own and their families' survival and well being. We seem to find here a classic case of the chote veniskar, the sinner who is rewarded for his sin. All these arguments lead one to believe that their actions might have been involuntary, pre-ordained and therefore not culpable, if we had not already explained previously that this was not the case. 5) If Joseph's reports to his father about his brothers' wrongdoing had been factual, he should have received a reward for alerting his father to actions which their father would not have been able to correct unless someone had told him about them. Why was he punished for this? If, on the other hand, his reports were not factual, the Torah should have written, "He made up evil reports," not "He brought home evil reports" (37,2)! 6) Hatred by the brothers is mentioned three times. We hear the word "jealousy" only in connection with the second dream, when there is no mention of the word "hatred." Why is this? Why are the words "to rule" and "to reign" used separately? What is the difference between them? 7) What prompted Jacob to send out Joseph to check on the welfare of the brothers on this of all days? Why did Joseph get lost? Why did the man whom he encountered tell Joseph about his brothers' plans to relocate? 8) Why did the brothers select a wild beast as their alibi instead of claiming that robbers had killed Joseph and that they had buried his remains? Why did Jacob not send a search party to find Joesph's bones to bury what was left? 9) What had been in Reuben's mind when he said "Do not shed blood?" His plan too would have resulted in Joseph's blood being spilled. Why did he say in his brothers' presence, "What will happen to me since the lad is gone!" Surely, this statement revealed to the brothers that he had intended to rescue Joseph? What is Rashi trying to say when he writes, "The holy spirit spoke here?" Even Yehudah's advice allowed for the chance of Joseph surviving and ultimately revenging himself. Why the confusing statements about the Midianites and the Ishmaelites? 10) Why did Jacob refuse to be comforted (see Moed Katan 27, that one must not grieve for the dead excessively)? The statement should have read, "Jacob was unable to accept comfort." 11) Why is the sequence of the story interrupted by the affairs of Yehudah and Tamar? Why does the Torah have to tell us the name of Yehudah's first father-in -law? What do the names of his three sons denote, and why are we interested in reading about Yehudah's whereabouts at the time Sheylah was born? 12) Since Yehudah's two older sons seem to have died for sins that gentiles are not culpable for, namely the deliberate wasting of semen, how could they have been guilty of the death penalty not even having been aware that there was a prohibition? What did Onan mean by saying that the issue would not be his? 13) Why did Yehudah delay marrying off Sheylah seeing that the reason he gave, "Maybe he will die too,” would apply for the remainder of his entire life? 14) How did Tamar know that Yehudah would want relations with her even if he did encounter her at a place where harlots customarily stationed themselves? Having encountered him, why did she set such a high price on her favors that she endangered her whole plan? Why did she become pregnant with twins? Why does the Torah give such a detailed report about the strange behavior of the infants during their birth? 15) What do our sages in Sotah 7 mean when they heap praise on Yehudah for his honesty in saying, "She is more righteous than I" i.e. that he publicly confessed without considering that by doing so he degraded himself in public? Either a harlot had been permitted for a man to lie with before the Torah had been given, or he could have married her as a partner in a levirate marriage. In either case, what was the great admission he made? How did he expose himself to public disgrace by admitting to conduct which was perfectly legal? If on the other hand, Tamar was legally as out of bounds to him at that time as she would be after the Torah legislation had been revealed to the Jewish people, he had committed a shameful act by living knowingly with a harlot, or he had engaged unknowingly in a forbidden incestuous relationship with his daughter-in-law, and a continuation of such relations was certainly out of the question? Besides, who had appointed Yehudah both judge and jury in the case of his daughter-in-law, that he had the right to execute her? Since when does a judge preside over a case in which he has a personal interest? 16) It is strange that Potiphar's wife should make a public issue of her involvement with Joseph, a revelation which would reflect discredit upon her regardless of the appearance of her having been wronged. She could have waited for Joseph to weaken at a later date. Why did Joseph leave his clothing behind when he ran out of the house?

And because of this, the People of Israel say every day: (Deut. 6:4) Hear O Israel Y”Y ELoQeYNU Y”Y One – Shm’a (Hear) Eḥad (One) , whose letters form SheM (Name) , AḤ (brother) , ’EiD (witness) . ‘Brother’ (aḥ) protects Her, because: (Prov. 17:17) ... and a brother is born for adversity, and about that it is stated: (Ps. 32:7) You are a ‘concealment’ (seter) for me, (Deut. 28:6) Blessed are you in your coming... (Gen. 49:8) Judah – you, your brothers will acknowledge... – because in him Judah – YeHUDaH is YQVQ, and in him is the the letter Dalet (ד) , – in Him, She is preserved.

Chapter (82) 83: Prophets [1] "I will assemble Jacob, all of you; I will bring together the remnant of Israel;. (Micah 2:12). Like it is said in scriptures: Assemble and listen, and complete [note: last word גומר doesn't exist in verse] (Genesis 49:2). Although the exact time of judgment day is unknown, I say to you that when you gather and assemble, at that moment you will be redeemed, as it is said, "I will surely gather all of you, O Jacob; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold, like a flock in its pasture, a noisy multitude of men" (Micah 2:12). "Reuben, you are my firstborn" (Genesis 49:3), I have not seen a blemish in you since I was born. "My might and the beginning of my strength" (same verse), since the day I was born I have been saying, "Perhaps Reuben will go up to the roof and die, or he will go down and fall." You were the beginning of my strength. "Excelling in dignity and excelling in power" (same verse), and because of the sin you committed, they took three crowns away from you and gave them to your brothers: the firstborn to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and the kingdom to Judah. Otherwise, you would have been the firstborn. "Excelling in dignity," that is the priesthood, as it is said, "And Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things" (Exodus 28:38). "Excelling in power," I was worthy of purifying them, as it is written, "To cleanse and to sprinkle" (Leviticus 14:56). "Unstable as water" (Genesis 49:4), our rabbis have taught that three liquids are forbidden because of exposure: water, wine, and milk. If one finds exposed milk, water, or wine, they should be spilled out, just as you are unstable as water. Alternatively, "unstable" means that you acted recklessly, disgracefully, and insulted others. Just as the vessels in which liquids are poured out or stored become unusable, but the liquids themselves remain, so too you, because of your sin, should not remain. Another thing: is raging like water. Just as water purifies for everyone, so too will you purify your sins when the one who is saved from the water comes to give you blood, and who is this but Moses, as it is written, "She called his name Moses, for I drew him out of the water" (Exodus 2:10). And when does he give you blood? When you spread out your bed (Genesis 49:14), when he comes to ascend Mount Nebo, as it is written, "Let Reuben live and not die" (Deuteronomy 33:6). "Simeon and Levi are brothers" (Genesis 49:5), and not only were they brothers, but they became brothers to do justice, as it is said, "And two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, took each man his sword" (Genesis 34:25). Their weapons are instruments of violence (Genesis 49:5). The Greek language is their swords. Jacob said, "If these two tribes sit together, they will destroy the world. But I will scatter them, divide them among Jacob and disperse them among Israel" (Genesis 49:7). "Judah, your brothers will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies" (Genesis 49:8), referring to his killing of Esau. Similarly, Moses said, "His hands are his to contend with; you helped him against his foes" (Deuteronomy 33:7). "Judah, your lion's cub; from prey, my son, you have gone up" (Genesis 49:9), which is as you were named. So did your mother say, "This time I will thank God" (Genesis 29:35), and she praised God in the story of Tamar, and all the tribes praised her. "The sons of my concubine have risen against me" (Genesis 49:29), Tamar's tragedy, that she and her two sons were already doomed, as it says "they brought her out and burned her" (Genesis 38:24), but she confessed and saved herself and her two sons, just as Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were saved whole when they were thrown into the furnace. "He crouches like a lion, like a lioness--who dares to rouse him?" (Genesis 49:9), referring to David, the anointed one from you, as it says "whose heart is like that of a lion" (2 Samuel 17:10). "Forbidding the vine its fruit [and the donkey's colt to drink] (Genesis 49:11). This refers to the Messiah who will arise from you, as it is written, 'humble and riding on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey' (Zechariah 9:9). And to the flute and the finisher. Where are the Israelites forbidden and their sins atoned for? In the territory of Judah in Jerusalem. 'The scepter shall not depart from Judah' (Genesis 49:10) refers to the kingdom, 'nor a lawgiver' (ibid.) refers to the leader, 'until Shiloh comes' (ibid.) refers to the Messiah, 'and to him shall be the obedience of the people' (ibid.). 'And the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king' (Hosea 3:5), and similarly it says, 'and she ate and was satisfied, and left over' (Ruth 2:14). 'And she ate' refers to the leader, as it is written, 'and from among your brothers you shall appoint a leader' (Deuteronomy 17:15), 'and was satisfied' refers to the kingdom, and 'left over' refers to the leadership. Zebulun shall dwell by the seashore, and he shall be a haven for ships (Genesis 49:13)." "He who makes ships, goes forth and comes back and brings sufficiency to the tribe of Yissachar, who occupy themselves with Torah, as it is said, Yissachar is a strong-boned donkey, crouching among the sheepfolds. And he saw a resting place that was good, and the land that it was pleasant, and he inclined his shoulder to bear, and became a servant to tribute. (Genesis 49:14-15). Those who toil in Torah, as it is said, "And of the children of Yissachar, who had understanding of the times, to know what Yisrael ought to do; the heads of them were two hundred; and all their brothers were at their commandment." (1 Chronicles 12:33). This teaches that two hundred members of the Sanhedrin stood from the tribe of Yissachar, and all of them were with the power of Zebulun, who go out to the sea and bring them [Yissachar] what they need, as it is said, "Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out, and Yissachar, in your tents." (Deuteronomy 33:18)." "Dan will judge his people" (Genesis 49:16). This refers to rest. "Let Dan be a serpent" (ibid. v. 17) refers to Samson, who, just as a serpent bites on its own, so too Samson fought and killed on his own. Another interpretation is that just as a serpent doesn't die if it is bitten on its tail or belly, because it only dies if it is bitten on the head (as it says, "You will strike his head," Genesis 3:15), so too Samson, when he was bound with his hands and feet, and his strength was not known, as soon as his hair was cut, his strength left him (Judges 16:19). Yet, even so, he bit the heels of a horse and its rider fell backward (Genesis 49:17), as he grasped both pillars and brought the house down (Judges 16:29), and Jacob exclaimed, "I have waited for Your salvation, O Lord" (Genesis 49:18). "Gad, a troop shall tramp upon him" (ibid. v. 19) refers to Elijah, who crushed the gang of a certain ruler. "He shall provide the first part for himself" (ibid. v. 20) refers to Asher, whose land produces rich fruits and excellent oil, and he brings olive oil as an offering (ibid.). "Naphtali is a hind let loose" (ibid. v. 21) refers to all those who study the Torah and are beloved to the Almighty like deer, as it says, "A loving hind and a graceful doe" (Proverbs 5:19). "Joseph is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a fountain" (Genesis 49:22). When Pharaoh heard Joseph's interpretation of his dreams, he said that Joseph was wise and discerning (Genesis 41:39). "His eyes are darker than wine" (Genesis 49:12) refers to Joseph's children, whom the other tribes did not begrudge, and the children of Joseph say to Joshua, "We are a numerous people and God has blessed us until now" (Joshua 17:14). Joshua said to them, "This is what you say, and yet you are not afraid of the evil eye?" They replied, "Jacob our father already prayed for us that the evil eye should not rule over us, as it is said, 'Against me [Jacob] was the evil eye' (Genesis 49:27), and Benjamin is compared to a wolf that tears (Genesis 49:27). In the Temple, which was built within its borders, they would sacrifice there one lamb, etc. (Numbers 28:4). Once he blessed each person according to their needs, he made them into tribes, as it is said, 'These are the tribes of Israel' (Genesis 49:28). He said to them, "Behold, I have blessed you," as it is said, 'And this is what their father spoke to them and blessed them' (Genesis 49:28). A faithful man will come and seal my blessings, and who is this? It is Moses, as it is said, 'And this is the blessing with which Moses blessed' (Deuteronomy 33:1)."

Another matter, “vekorbano…” – what did the princes see that led them to present offerings in this manner? The Rabbis say: Even though each of them presented an identical offering, they offered it regarding significant matters, and each and every one presented according to his perspective. Naḥshon began and presented regarding the protocol of the monarchy, just as his father crowned him over his brothers, just as it says: “Judah, you, your brothers will acknowledge you…[your father's sons will prostrate themselves to you]. Judah is a lion cub…” (Genesis 49:8–9). Likewise it says: “For Judah prevailed over his brothers, as the prince would come from him” (I Chronicles 5:2). There was a tradition in the hand of the tribe of Judah, their Sages, and their prominent leaders, from Jacob our patriarch, regarding everything that is destined to befall each tribe until the messianic era. Likewise, there was a tradition in the hand of each and every tribe regarding what would befall it until the messianic era, from Jacob their father. “Vekorbano…” – he presented the dish and the basin corresponding to the kings of the house of David, who are destined to emerge from him, who ruled over the entire world, over the sea and over the land, e.g., Solomon and the messianic king. Solomon, from where is it derived? It is as it is written: “For he ruled over the entire region beyond the river, from Tifsaḥ to Gaza” (I Kings 5:4). Rav and Shmuel, one said Tifsaḥ is at one end of the world and Gaza is at the other end of the world. One said: They stand adjacent to one another; just as he ruled over Tifsaḥ and over Gaza, so he ruled over the entire world. And it says: “All the world sought the presence of Solomon, to hear his wisdom…. Each would bring his tribute…” (I Kings 10:24–25). From where is it derived that he ruled over the sea? It is as it is written: “Also the fleet of Hiram, which had carried gold from Ophir…” (I Kings 10:11). “For the king had a fleet of Tarshish at sea with the fleet of Hiram. Once every three years…” (I Kings 10:22). And it says: “I will set his hand upon the seas, his right on the rivers” (Psalms 89:26). The messianic king, from where is it derived? It is, as it is written: "He will rule from sea to sea, from the river to the ends of the land" (Psalms 72:8). Over the land, from where is it derived? It is as it is written: “And all the kings, all the nations will bow to him, will serve him” (Psalms 72:11). And it says: “And behold, among the clouds of the heavens…. To him was given dominion, [honor, and kingship, and all the peoples, nations, and languages would serve him]” (Daniel 7:13–14). “The stone that struck the image became a great mountain, and filled the entire earth” (Daniel 2:35). This is why he presented a dish, corresponding to the sea that surrounds the entire world and resembles a dish. Why was “its weight one hundred and thirty”? (Numbers 7:13). It is because when the Holy One blessed be He gathered all the waters to one place on the third day of the formation of the world, he called them seas, as it is stated: “And to the gathering of the waters, He called seas [yamim]” (Genesis 1:10). The numerical value of yamim is one hundred; yod, yod are twenty, mem, mem are eighty, that is one hundred. Solomon came and added a sea to the construction of the Temple in which the priests could immerse themselves, just as it says: “He crafted the sea, of cast metal, ten cubits from brim to brim, [circular around, and its height was five cubits; a thirty-cubit line would wrap around it]” (I Kings 7:23). Corresponding to those thirty cubits that was the circumference of the sea that Solomon crafted, he added thirty shekels to the weight of the dish corresponding to the sea of Solomon. That is one hundred and thirty shekels, the weight of the dish, corresponding to the seas and to the sea of Solomon. “One silver basin” (Numbers 7:13), it is corresponding to the world, that is shaped like an orb that is tossed from hand to hand. Why was its weight “seventy shekels”? (Numbers 7:13). It is because both of them (Solomon and the Messianic king.) ruled over seventy nations, which exist from one end of the world to the other end. From where is it derived that the sea is shaped in the form of a dish and the world is shaped like an orb? It is like that which we learned: The Rabbis say: Only one that has in its hand a staff, a bird, an orb, a dish, a sword, a crown, or a ring is forbidden. (A statue of a person in whose hands one of these objects appears is considered an idol, and it is forbidden to benefit from it in any way.) A staff, as it rules the entire world with it. A bird: “My hand has grasped the riches of the peoples like a nest” (Isaiah 10:14). An orb, as the world is shaped like an orb. Rabbi Yona said: Alexander of Macedonia, when he sought to ascend heavenward, he would rise and rise until he would see the world as an orb and the sea as a dish. That is why, when they draw him, it is with an orb in his hand. Should they draw him with a dish in his hand? He does not have dominion over the sea. But the Holy One blessed be He has dominion over the sea and has dominion over the land, recues at sea and rescues on land; that is why they brought a dish corresponding to the sea and a basin corresponding to the land. “Both of them full [of high quality flour]" (Numbers 7:13), as the nation brought tributes [menaḥot] (The word menahot can also refer to meal offerings, which typically consist of high quality flour.) to Solomon; likewise they are destined to bring it to the messianic king, just as it says: “[The kings of Tarshish and of the islands will bring tribute [minḥa]]; the kings of Sheba and Seva will offer gifts” (Psalms 72:10). “Full [mele’im]” means nothing other than gifts, just as it says: “And gave them all [vaymalum] to the king” (I Samuel 18:27). “High quality flour [solet]" (Numbers 7:13), just as it says: "valued [hamesulaim] like gold" (Lamentations 4:2). "Mixed with oil” (Numbers 7:13), just as it says: “A good name is better than fragrant oil” (Ecclesiastes 7:1), and it says: “Your name is like poured oil” (Song of Songs 1:3), as their good name would go forth throughout the world. Why were they of silver? It is just as it says: “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver” (Proverbs 10:20). “One gold ladle, ten shekels, [full of incense]” (Numbers 7:14), corresponding to the ten generations from Peretz to David, as it is stated: “These are the generations of Peretz: [Peretz begot Hetzron]; and Hetzron begot [Ram, and Ram begot Aminadav;] Aminadav begot Naḥshon, [and Naḥshon begot Salmon; Salmon begot Boaz, and Boaz begot Oved]; and Oved begot [Yishai], and Yishai begot David” (Ruth 4:18–22). “One…ladle,” as they were all like one hand, all full-fledged righteous men. That is, “full of incense” (Numbers 7:14), as their actions were pleasant like the fragrance of the incense. “One young bull” (Numbers 7:15), corresponding to Abraham, who was the primary progenitor, and who, in his regard, it is stated: “Abraham ran to the cattle [and took a young bull]” (Genesis 18:7). “One ram” (Numbers 7:15), this is Isaac, as, in his regard it is stated: “He took the ram and he offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son” (Genesis 22:13). “One sheep” (Numbers 7:15), corresponding to Jacob, in whose regard it is stated: “Jacob separated the sheep” (Genesis 30:40). “One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:16), corresponding to Judah, who brought Joseph’s fine tunic that he had immersed in the blood of the goat, as it is stated: “They slaughtered a goat [and they dipped the tunic in the blood]" (Genesis 37:31). Judah brought it to his father and said: “Identify this, please, is it your son’s tunic?” (Genesis 37:32). That is why it was meted to him with the same measure, as Tamar said to him: “Identify, please, whose signet, belt, [and staff are these?]” (Genesis 38:25). That is why sin offering is stated in this regard, as they brought it as atonement for him, because he brought anguish to his father. “And for the peace offering [hashelamim], two cattle” (Numbers 7:17) – these are David and Solomon, as they initiated the monarchy, as cattle [bakar] is nothing other than an expression of monarchy, just as it says: “Butter of cattle [bakar] and milk of sheep…” (Deuteronomy 32:14), and we translate it: Give them the plunder of their kings. (Targum Onkelos on the verse. Shelamim) , because they were full-fledged righteous men, (Shelamim is expounded as though it is written shelemim, complete.) and in their days, Israel were flawless [mushlamim], and in the days of Solomon, the kingdom was complete [shelema], as it is stated: “Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord” (I Chronicles 29:23). The two of them built the Temple; David made the foundation, and Solomon built it. “Five rams, five goats, five sheep in their first year” (Numbers 7:17) – these are fifteen corresponding to the fifteen kings who were from Reḥavam until Zedekiah, king son of a king. Some were full-fledged righteous men, some were middling, and some were full-fledged wicked men. “This was the offering of Naḥshon son of Aminadav” (Numbers 7:17). When the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented his offering corresponding to the order of the patriarchs and the royal dynasty, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of Naḥshon son of Aminadav.”

“Peoples will serve you, and nations will prostrate themselves to you. Be a lord to your brethren, and your mother’s sons will prostrate themselves to you. Cursed be one who curses you, and blessed be one who blesses you” (Genesis 27:29). “Peoples will serve you” – these are the seventy nations. “And nations will prostrate themselves to you” – these are the descendants of Ishmael and the sons of Ketura, in whose regard it is written: “Ashurim, Letushim, and Leumim” (Genesis 25:3). “Be a lord to your brethren” – this is Esau and his chieftains. “And your mother’s sons will prostrate themselves to you” – here it says: “And your mother’s sons will prostrate themselves to you,” but elsewhere it says: “And your father’s sons will prostrate themselves to you” (Genesis 49:8). It is that Jacob, because he took four wives, Leah, Rachel, Zilpa, and Bilha, he says: “Your father’s sons.” Isaac took Rebecca, he said: “Your mother’s sons.” “Cursed be one who curses you…” – and elsewhere it says: “Those who bless you are blessed, and those who curse you are cursed” (Numbers 24:9). It is that Bilam, because he was a hater, began with a blessing and concluded with a curse. Yitzḥak, who was a lover, opened with a curse and concluded with a blessing. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Rabbi Ḥiyya said: The wicked, because their beginning is tranquility and their end is suffering, they begin with blessing and end with curse. The righteous, because their beginning is suffering and their end is tranquility, they begin with curse and end with blessing: “Cursed be one who curses you, and blessed be one who blesses you.”

“Judah, you shall your brothers acknowledge; your hand will be at the nape of your enemies; your father’s sons will prostrate themselves to you” (Genesis 49:8). “Judah, you shall your brothers acknowledge” – your brothers acknowledge you; your mother acknowledges you; I, myself, acknowledge you. (All acknowledge you as worthy of honor and kingship. ) Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: All your brothers will be called by your name. A person does not say: I am a Reubenite, I am a Simeonite, but rather: I am a Jew [Yehudi]. (Judah is called Yehuda in Hebrew.) Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said: This is analogous to a king who had twelve sons, and there was one who was more beloved to him than all of them, and he gave him a portion of his own and a portion with his brothers. (Similarly, Judah was its own tribe, and additionally the entire nation became known as Jews. ) “Your hand will be at the nape of your enemies” – how many times did Joshua prostrate himself so that the nape would be shown him, but it was not granted to him, as it is stated: “Please, my Lord, what can I say after [Israel] has turned [its nape before their enemies?]” (Joshua 7:8). To whom did He grant it? To David: “My enemies, you had them turn their napes to me” (II Samuel 22:41). Why? Because it was his ancestral endowment, as it is written in his regard: “Your hand will be at the nape of your enemies.” “Your father’s sons will prostrate themselves to you” – here it says: “Your father’s sons will prostrate themselves to you,” but elsewhere, it says: “Your mother’s sons will prostrate themselves to you” (Genesis 27:29). It is that Isaac, because he took only one wife, said: “Your mother’s sons will prostrate themselves to you.” But [when] Jacob [gave blessings], because he took four wives, it is written: “Your father’s sons will prostrate themselves to you.”

“Judah, you shall your brothers acknowledge; your hand will be at the nape of your enemies; your father’s sons will prostrate themselves to you” (Genesis 49:8). Simeon and Levi, too, emerged with their faces crestfallen, and Judah feared that [Jacob] would mention the incident of Tamar to him. He began calling him: “Judah, you shall your brothers acknowledge [yodukha].” The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You confessed [hodeita] (Hodeita has the same root in Hebrew as the term yodukha. ) in the incident of Tamar; your brothers will acknowledge you to be king over them.’ “Your hand will be at the nape [beoref] of your enemies” – this is David, who descended from him, and in whose regard it is written: “My enemies, You had them turn their backs [oref] to me” (II Samuel 22:41). “Your father’s sons will prostrate themselves to you” – Isaac said to Jacob: “Your mother’s sons” (Genesis 27:29), as he had only one wife, Rebecca. But Jacob, who had four wives, said to Judah: “Your father’s sons.” “Judah is a lion cub; from prey, my son, you ascended. He crouches, lies like a lion; and like a great cat, who shall rouse him” (Genesis 49:9). “Judah is a lion cub; from prey, my son, you ascended” – from the prey of Joseph, as you said: “What profit [is there if we kill our brother and conceal his blood?]” (Genesis 37:26). Alternatively, “from prey” – from the prey of Tamar, as you saved four lives – you, Tamar, and her two sons. (When Tamar’s pregnancy became known, Judah sentenced her to death, thinking she had committed sexual immorality. When she proved to him that he was the father, he conceded that she was innocent and ordered her life spared, after which she gave birth to twins. See Genesis, chapter 38. ) The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You saved four; I will save four of your descendants – Daniel, Ḥananya, Mishael, and Azarya.’ He called him four names: “Judah is a lion cub”; “he crouched and lay like a lion, and like a great cat, [who shall rouse him?]” (Numbers 24:9). (Thus, Judah is referred to as a lion, a cub, again a lion, and a great cat. ) “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, or the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until Shilo arrives; and to him nations will assemble” (Genesis 49:10). “The scepter shall not depart from Judah” – this is the royal throne: “Your throne is of God forever; the staff of righteousness” (Psalms 45:7) – when? “The ruler’s staff from between his feet” – with the arrival of the one to whom kingship belongs, of whom it is written: “With feet will the crown [of pride of the drunkards of Ephraim] be trampled” (Isaiah 28:3). “Until Shilo arrives” – the one to whom kingdom belongs [shelo]. “And to him nations will assemble [yik’hat]” – the one who dulls [mak’heh] the teeth of all the nations, as it is stated: “They will place hand over mouth; their ears will be deafened” (Micah 7:16). Alternatively, “and to him nations will assemble” – the one for whom the nations of the world will assemble, as it is stated: “The root of Yishai, that stands as a banner of the peoples, nations will seek him” (Isaiah 11:10). (In other words, the verse here is a reference to the Messiah, as is the verse in Isaiah. ) “He will bind his foal to the vine, and to the branch of the vine his donkey’s foal; he launders his garments in wine, and in the blood of grapes, his clothes” (Genesis 49:11). “He will bind his foal to the vine” – when He will gather all of Israel, which is called “vine,” as it is stated: “You transported a vine from Egypt” (Psalms 80:9). “And to the branch of the vine his donkey’s foal” – this is the one in whose regard it is written: “He is humble, and riding upon a donkey…” (Zechariah 9:9). Another matter: “And to the branch of the vine his donkey’s foal” – it is the one who plants all of Israel like a vine branch. How does he do so? “I will sprinkle pure water upon you” (Ezekiel 36:25). “He launders his garments in wine” – as wine is abundant within his borders. And in the blood of grapes, his clothes [suto]” – suto is nothing other than error, as it is written: “If your brother…will entice you [yesitekha]…” (Deuteronomy 13:7). (This is referring to one who incites another to engage in idol worship.) If they err in halakha, it will be laundered within his domain. (It will be clarified before the Great Sanhedrin, in the Temple, which is located in the tribal portion of Judah.) “His eyes shall be red from wine, and his teeth white from milk” (Genesis 49:12). “His eyes shall be red [ḥakhlili] from wine” – from here you learn that wine is abundant in his domain, like a person who says to another: ‘Pour for me, and again, as my palate is sweet to me, a sweet palate for me, for me [ḥeikh li li].’ “And his teeth white from milk” – due to the merit of the Torah, “if your sins will be like scarlet, they will be whitened as snow” (Isaiah 1:18).

(Jos. 10, 13) And the sun stood still .........written in the book of Yashar. What is the book of Yashar? Said R. Chiya b. Aba in the name of R. Jochanan: "This refers to (Genesis) the book in which the birth of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who are named Jesharim (the upright), as it is said (Num. 23, 10) Let me die the death of the righteous Jesharim, etc. And where is it hinted [that such a miracle will occur with Joshua]? From (Gen. 48, 19) And his seed shall become a multitude of nations, i.e., when shall his seed become a multitude of nations? At the time when Joshua stopped the sun. (Jos. 10, 13) And the sun stood still in the midst of the heavens, and hastened not to go down about a whole day. How many hours? Said R. Joshua b. Levi: "Twenty-four hours; it went six [hours] and stopped six, went six, and stopped six, the entire episode lasting a whole day." R. Elazar said: "Thirty-six hours, it went six [hours] and stopped twelve, it went six, and stopped twelve; its stopping time was equal to a whole day [24 hours]." R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "Forty-eight, it went six and stopped twelve, went six and stopped twenty-four, for it is said, And it hastened not to go down about a whole day." According to the above, they differ in the additional hours of that day.We are taught in a Baraitha: Just as the sun stopped for Joshua, so also did it stop for Moses. An objection was raised from (Ib. ib. 14) And there was no day like that before it or after it. If you wish, in the time of Moses it stopped for fewer hours, or if you wish, it may be said that in Moses' time there were no hailstones mentioned, as the passage says (Ib. ib. 11) And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, etc., that the Lord cast down great stones, and said: To teach the sons of Judah the bow, Behold it is written in the book of Yashar. What does Yashar mean? Said R. Chiya b. Aba in the name of R. Jochanan: "This refers to Genesis [as said above]. And where is it hinted [that Judah will be fighters]? It is written (Gen. 49, 8) Thy hand shall be on the neck of thy enemies. Which is the weapon that needs the hand against the neck? It is the how," R. Elazar, however, maintains that the book of Yashar refers to Deuteronomy. And why is it named Yashar? Because there is a passage (6, 18) And thou shalt do that which is right (Yashar) and good in the eyes of the Lord. And where is the intimation of this? (33, 7) Let the power of his hands. And which is the weapon for which both hands are needed? It is the bow." R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "It refers to the book of Judges. And why is it called Yashar? Because therein is written (17, 6) Every man did what seemed right (Yashar) in his eyes. And where is it intimated [in the Biblical text]? (3, 2) To teach them war. And what is the weapon for which teaching is necessary? This is the bow. And whence do we know that this refers to Judah? The passage reads (Ib. 1, 1) Who shall go up for us first against them? And the Lord said: 'Judah shall go up.' "

(13) And Haman related to Zereth his wife and to all his friends. And then it is written: Then said unto him his wise men and Zereth his wife; first they are called friends, and then wise men? R. Jochanan said: "A man, even of any nation, who says an intelligent thing only should be termed wise (Chacham). If Mordecai be of the seed of the Judeans; i.e., they said: "If Mordecai is descended from other tribes, you will get the better of him; but if he be descended from one of these tribes — Juda, Benjamin, Ephraim, Menaseeh — then you cannot overcome him; from Juda, because it is written (Gen. 49, 8) Thy hand shall be on the neck of thy enemies; and the other three, because it is written (Ps. 80, 3) Before Ephraim, Benjamin and Menasseh, awaken thy might." But thou will surely fall before him. R. Juda b. Ilai taught: "What is the meaning surely fall [doubled in the test]? Infer from this that they said to him thus: 'This nation (Israel) resembles earth, and resembles stars; when they sink they sink to the dust, and when they rise they rise to the stars.' " (Est. 6, 14) They were yet speaking with him when the king's chamberlains arrived, and they hastened. From this we infer that they brought him in a hurry. For the adversary regardeth not the damage of the king. She said to him: "This enemy is not worth the damage he causes to the king; when he became jealous of Vashti, he killed her, and now he becomes jealous of me, and wants to kill me too." And the king arose in his fury … and when the king returned. From this we may infer that just as he had gone out in a fury, so he returned in a fury; he went to his garden and found that angels, in the form of men, were uprooting the trees of his garden and throwing them away. Upon his inquiry as to why they were doing it, he was informed that Haman had ordered them to do so. When he returned to his house he found Haman was fallen upon the couch, etc. It is not written, fell [active case], but, was fallen [passive case]; i.e., infer from this that an angel came and pushed him. And the king said: "Woe from inside, and woe from outside." And the king said: "Will he even do violence to the queen before me in the house?" Then said Harbonah, one of the chamberlains, etc. R. Chama b. Chanina said: "Harbonah the wicked had also been among those who had given the advice to make a gallows for Mordecai; but as soon as he saw that his plan was not fulfilled, he deserted Haman and went over to Mordecai's friends, and this interpretation is derived from the passage (Job 27, 22) And will cast upon him, and have no pity; out of his hand will surely escape. And the fury of the king [Shachacha] was appeased. What does the double (appeasing) stand for? One refers to the King of the Universe and the other refers to Ahasuerus. Others, however, say that one refers to the anger about Vashti and one about Esther."

When Jacob came to bless Judah, he said to him (in Gen. 49:8): AND MAY YOUR FATHER'S CHILDREN BOW DOWN TO YOU, because he had a lot of wives. But Isaac, because he only had Rebekah, said to Jacob (in Gen. 27:29): AND MAY YOUR MOTHER'S CHILDREN BOW DOWN TO YOU. (Gen. R. 66:4.)

(Gen. 49:6:) FOR IN THEIR ANGER THEY KILLED A MAN, when they killed Shechem ben Hamor. He said to them: You have afflicted me. Immediately (in vs. 7): CURSED BE THEIR ANGER SO FIERCE. These tribes were unable to dwell together. Rather (ibid., cont.): I WILL DIVIDE THEM IN JACOB AND SCATTER THEM IN ISRAEL. Judah came in and < Jacob > praised him (in vs. 8): YOU, O JUDAH, YOUR BROTHERS SHALL PRAISE (rt.: YDH). In your case, your mother gave praise (rt.: YDH) through your name (Judah, rt.: YDH). When she bore you, she said (in Gen. 29:35): THIS TIME I WILL PRAISE (rt.: YDH) THE LORD; < THEREFORE SHE CALLED HIS NAME JUDAH (rt.: YDH) >. And what did she see to praise in Judah? It is simply that she had given birth to Reuben and foreseen Dathan and Abiram (in Numb. 16:1); so she had not given praise over him (i.e., Reuben). She had given birth to Simeon and foreseen Zimri; so she had not given praise over him. She had given birth to Levi and foreseen Korah; so she had not given praise over him. When she gave birth to Judah, she immediately gave praise (rt.: YDH) over him because he made a confession (rt.: YDH) in the Tamar incident, as stated (in Gen. 38:26): THEN JUDAH GAVE ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND SAID: SHE IS MORE RIGHTEOUS THAN I. (See Gen. R. 99 (another version):8 (= p. 1279 in the Theodor-Albeck edition).) His father said to him: Your mother has given praise (rt.: YDH) over you, and you have made a confession (rt.: YDH). Therefore your brothers shall praise (rt.: YDH) you. (Although the Buber text has “him” here, the correct reading must be “you.”) When Isaac blessed Jacob, he had said to him (in Gen. 27:29): AND MAY YOUR MOTHER'S CHILDREN BOW DOWN TO YOU, since he had only one wife. But, since Jacob had four wives, he said (in Gen. 49:8): YOUR FATHER'S CHILDREN < SHALL BOW DOWN TO YOU >. (Gen. R. 66:4.) Why shall your brothers praise you? Because all Israel shall be called by your name, < i.e., > Jews. (Gen. R. 98(99):6. In Hebrew the word “Jews” is simply the plural of Judah, which in turn has the same root as the Hebrew verb meaning “praise.”) And not only that, but out of you is coming the Messiah, who is saving Israel, as stated (in Is. 11:10): BUT A SHOOT SHALL COME FORTH FROM THE STEM OF JESSE…. (Cf. Romans 15:12; Rev. 5:5.)

(Gen. 49:28, cont.:) AND THIS IS WHAT THEIR FATHER SPOKE TO THEM WHEN HE BLESSED THEM. EACH ONE WITH HIS OWN BLESSING IS HOW HE BLESSED THEM. "Him" is not written here but HE BLESSED THEM. (Tanh., Gen. 12:17; Gen. R. 97, New Version, on 49:28 (= pp. 1227—1228 in the Theodor-Albeck edition); 99(100)4; Numb. R. 13:8; Cant. R. 4:7:1; cf. also Exod. R. 1:6, 16.) Why so? Because (in Gen. 49:8-22) he gave Judah the strength of a lion, Joseph the strength of an ox, (Shor. Although the Masoretic Text of Gen. 49:22, from which this allusion is taken, vocalizes this word as shur, i.e., “wall,” the present context requires that Joseph be likened to some animal.) Naphtali the lightness of a deer, and Dan the bite of a serpent. You might say that one is greater than another; < so > their commonality is < mentioned > at the end. EACH ONE WITH HIS OWN BLESSING … HE BLESSED THEM. Thus he distributed the land to them. He gave Judah the land which produces barley and Benjamin land which produces wheat. Even so, they had a commonality with each other in that they each would eat what belonged to the other. Ergo (in Gen. 49:28): AND THIS IS WHAT THEIR FATHER SPOKE TO THEM. "Unto them" is not written here but TO THEM. (Buber cites Samuel Jaffe ben Isaac Ashkenazi, Yefeh To’ar, a commentary on the Midrash Rabbah, Part I on Genesis (Venice, 1597—1606), who cites Rashi, on Gen. 24:7, and explains that “to them” (lahem) used with the verb “speak” (rt.: DBR), as opposed to its use with the verb “say” (rt.: ’MR), means that one is speaking “concerning them” rather than “with them,” which is what “unto them” (alehem) would have implied. So also Enoch Zundel ben Joseph in his commentary Ets Yosef, on Tanh., Gen. 12:16. For a suggested rendering, see the following note.) (Ibid.:) AND THIS < is how > someone like me is going to bless you, and at the place where I have stopped he is beginning. Thus it is stated (ibid.): AND THIS IS WHAT THEIR FATHER SPOKE TO THEM. (Apart from the words AND THIS (in the sense of ALSO THIS), there is another hint there that the verse has a wider meaning in that Jacob is simply alluded to as THEIR FATHER instead of by name. Like Jacob, Moses is a father of Israel.) When Moses arose, he opened (the blessing in Deut. 33:1) with AND THIS IS THE BLESSING < WITH WHICH MOSES, THE MAN OF GOD, BLESSED THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL BEFORE HE DIED >. < He began > from where Jacob had stopped. Ergo (in Gen. 49:28 also): AND THIS. He said these blessings for them. When did they come to pass for you? From the time that you received the Torah, about which it is written (in Deut. 4:44): AND THIS IS THE TORAH. Note the AND THIS. And also, with whatever < expression > Jacob had closed his blessing, Moses opened for them. Moses said (in Ps. 119:100): I HAVE GAINED UNDERSTANDING FROM THE ELDERS. When Isaac blessed Jacob, he said (in Gen. 28:3): MAY GOD ALMIGHTY BLESS YOU. With what did he finally close his blessing? With a calling (according to Gen. 28:1): SO ISAAC CALLED JACOB AND BLESSED HIM. So, in the case of Jacob, where his father had stopped, from there he had begun (according to Gen. 49:1): THEN JACOB CALLED HIS SONS. Then, Jacob stopped (in Gen. 49:28) with THIS; so Moses also, when he arose to bless the tribes, began with AND THIS (in Deut. 33:1): AND THIS IS THE BLESSING. And with what did Moses close? With BLESSED ARE YOU, as stated (in Deut. 33:29): BLESSED ARE YOU, O ISRAEL! WHO IS LIKE YOU? See < how > David opened (Ps. 1:1)! With BLESSED IS THE ONE. Ergo (in Ps. 119:100): I HAVE GAINED UNDERSTANDING FROM THE ELDERS.

Another interpretation: Judah bar Shallum the Levite said: When she came out, the Holy One made her eyes light up and she found them after she had lost them because there is no finding except of what is LOST. Thus it is written (in Lev. 5:22): OR HAS FOUND WHAT IS LOST. Immediately she sent < her tokens of the pledge > to Judah, (according to Gen. 38:25) THE ONE TO WHOM THESE BELONG. She said to him (ibid., cont.): PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE your Creator. (Gen. R., 97, New Version, on Gen. 49:8 (= p. 1214 in the Theodor-Albeck edition) explains that for Judah to acknowledge the Creator meant for him not to be ashamed in confessing the matter before flesh and blood. Cf. Sot. 10b.) Immediately (in vs. 26): JUDAH GAVE ACKNOWLEDGMENT. In that hour a heavenly voice (bat qol) came forth and said to him: You are to say: [She is pregnant from me; lest] she be burned. And afterwards he confessed: The affair stemmed from me. The Holy One said to Him: Judah, for me you have saved three lives from the fire and one (i.e., Joseph) from the pit. By your life, I will save < four lives > for you just as you have saved < them > for me. Who are they? Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah from the fiery furnace (in Dan. 3:20-27) and Daniel from the lions' pit (in Dan. 6:16-23). What is written about them (in Dan. 1:6)? NOW AMONG THOSE FROM THE CHILDREN OF JUDAH WERE DANIEL, HANANIAH, MISHAEL, AND AZARIAH. "From Hezekiah's children" (See PRE 52 at the end; Sanh. 93b.) is not written here, but FROM THE CHILDREN OF JUDAH. For what reason? For the reason that he had saved Tamar and her children < from the fire > and Joseph from the pit. When Reuben heard that Judah had confessed, he immediately arose also and said: I also have violated my father's beds (in Gen. 35:22). Eliphaz said to Job (in Job 15:17-18): I WILL INFORM YOU; HEARKEN TO ME. NOW THIS HAVE I SEEN, AND I WILL DECLARE THAT WHICH SAGES HAVE TOLD. These < sages > are Reuben and Judah. Therefore (in vs. 19): TO THEM ALONE WAS THE LAND GIVEN. When? (Ibid.:) AND NO STRANGER PASSED AMONG THEM. When Moses came to bless them, what did he say (in Deut. 33:6-7)? MAY REUBEN LIVE AND NOT DIE…. AND THIS IS FOR JUDAH….

(Deut. 32:1:) “Let my instruction drop down like the rain.” R. Joshua ben Levi said, “When Moses went up to the heights, the angels were about to kill him. (See ARN, A, 2:3; Shab. 88b; Exod. R. 28:1.) He said to them, ‘Is it because of the two things that were granted to me [from the heavens] that you wish to kill me?’ When they heard this, they left him alone. A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To a great merchant who was walking in a dangerous place. [When some] brigands (Gk.: lestai.) seized him [and] wanted to kill him, he said to them, ‘Is it because of the five minas (There are four hundred minas to a shekel.) in my hand that you wish to kill me?’ But they did not know that there were in his hand precious stones and pearls (Gk.: margaritai or margeleis.) which were invaluable. They said to each other, ‘What profit is there in killing him? He has nothing on him.’ So they left him alone. When he entered the city, he began to sell precious stones and pearls. They said to him, ‘When we captured you yesterday, you said, “There is nothing on me but five minas”; but now you are bringing out precious stones and pearls which are invaluable?’ He said to them, ‘When I spoke to you, I was in a dangerous situation.’ So also did Moses our master say to the angels, ‘There are [only] two things with me.’ [In fact] there was a great gift with him, as stated (in Ps. 68:19), ‘You ascended on high; [you captured captives; you received gifts for humans].’” (Some translations interpret the passage to mean that the gifts are from humans, but the midrash requires the interpretation given here.) Therefore David said (in Ps. 119:72), “The Torah of Your mouth is better for me [than thousands of gold and silver pieces].” It also says (in Ps. 19:11), “More delightful are they than gold, than much fine gold”; and it says (in Ps. 12:7), “The sayings of the Lord are [pure] sayings....” Israel said to Moses our master, “Fortunate are you, for your having received gifts.” He said to them, “If I had not said to the ministering angels that there were [only] two things, I should have been burned by their fire, but this Torah saved me from their hand. It was with reference to them that he said (in Deut. 32:2), “Let my instruction drop down like the rain.” “Drop down (rt.: 'rp)” must mean killing, since it is stated (in Deut. 21:4), “and they shall break the neck (rt.: 'rp) of the heifer there”; and so too with Judah, it states (in Gen. 49:8), “your hand will be on the neck (rt.: 'rp) of your enemy.” And my instruction must mean Torah, since it is stated (in Prov. 4:2), “For I gave you good instruction....” And why is Torah compared to rain? To say [that] just as rain erodes, as it states (in Job 14:19), “Water erodes stones”; so does the Torah erode a heart of stone. And this is related to that which our masters say (in Qidd. 30b), “If [the evil impulse] is [like] a stone, it will be dissolved. If it is [like] iron, it will be shattered.” Therefore, there is nothing that is good for a man besides killing himself over the words of the Torah and to constantly occupy himself with it, day and night. And it is so stated (in Josh. 1:8), “and you shall meditate upon them night and day.” And this is related to that which they said (in Meg. 6b), “If a man tells you, “I have toiled but I have not found,’ do not believe [it].” And it is therefore compared to rain. Just like there can be no world without rain, as it is needed to grow all good things; so can the world not survive without Torah, as it is stated (Jer. 33:25), “Were it not that I have established My covenant day and night, I would not have put the laws of heaven and earth.” And just like rain descends little by little, so too with the Torah, one starts at the beginning with the small count of aleph, bet, gimmel, and comes to the large count of kof, reish, shin at the end. So does one start and then one understands the Torah and its details. Another interpretation (of Deut. 32:2), “Let my instruction drop down like the rain.” Israel said to Moses our master, “You have not come to speak with heaven and earth but with the rain and the dew.” He said to them, “[Let me tell you] a parable. It is comparable to a wealthy person who went to honor the king. He took with him great ministers and honored men. [So when] he went into the king along with them, the king received them cordially.” So also did Moses say, “It is better for me to call for heaven and earth, the rain and the dew to be with me, so that when I call upon the Holy One, blessed be He, He will answer me.” For that reason he said to them (in Deut. 32:1-2), “Give ear, O heavens…. Let [my instruction] drop down like the rain…”; and [then] afterwards (in Deut. 31:3), “For I am proclaiming the name of the Lord.”

Next he began to call out: Judah, thee shall thy brothers praise (Gen. 49:8). Because you acknowledged your guilt concerning what happened to Tamar, your brothers will acknowledge you as king over them. (Judah had sentenced Tamar to die, but reversed his decision when he realized that he was responsible for her behavior because he had not married her to his son Shelah as the law required (see Gen. 38.).)

Thy father’s sons shall bow down before thee (Gen. 49:8). Isaac had said to Jacob: Thy mother’s son shall bow down (ibid. 27:29) because he had only one wife. However, since Jacob had many wives, he said to Judah: Thy father’s sons shall bow before thee.

Conversely, Leah spoke words of praise, and her offspring continued the tradition of praise. She declared: This time will I praise the Lord (Gen. 29:35); and of her son Judah it is said: Judah, thee thy brethren praise (ibid. 49:8). David (another descendant) said: Praise the Lord, for He is good (Ps. 118:1); and concerning Daniel it is said: Daniel kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and praised (Dan. 6:11). R. Judah said: Silence is so very important that Rachel was privileged, because of her silence, to rear two additional tribes in Israel, Ephraim and Manasseh.

"And you have given me the back of your enemies." This passage speaks about Judah. Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said in the name of Rabbi Judah bar Elai that it is a legendary tradition that Judah killed Esau. When did this happen? When Isaac died, Jacob and Esau and all the tribes went to bury him, as it is written (Genesis 35:29), "And Esau and Jacob, his sons, buried him." They went into a cave and stood and wept, and the tribes stood and paid tribute to Jacob. They went out of the cave so that Jacob would not be disgusted and humiliated in front of them. Esau himself crawled into the cave. Judah went in after him and said, "Perhaps he will kill my father." Esau crawled in and found that he was seeking to kill his father. Immediately, Judah stood up and killed him from behind. Why did he not kill him face to face? Because Esau's face resembled Jacob's, so Judah honored him and killed him from behind. And this is why his father blessed him (Genesis 49:8), "Your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies." Why on the neck? Joshua argued before the Holy One, blessed be He, that He should give him the neck, but He did not give it to him. As it is written (Joshua 7:8), "What will you do for your great name when Israel turns its back?" Yet it did not help anything. To whom did He give the neck? To the tribe of Judah, as it is written, "Your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies." Similarly, David said, "And you have given me the back of my enemies" (Psalm 18:41). My interpreter said, "And this is for Judah," as it is written (Deuteronomy 33:7), "And this is for Judah," and he said, "Who taught his hands to fight for him?" From Migdal. As it is written (1 Samuel 17:49), "And the stone sank into his forehead, and he fell on his face." He did not need to fall, but after him, and why did he fall on his face? Because the angel pushed him on his face. The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "The mouth that blasphemes and reviles (may it hang in the air) will be closed in the dust." As it is written (Job 20:11), "His bones are full of his youthful vigor, but it lies down with him in the dust." Another explanation is why on his face, so that David would not be upset and go and cut off his head. He was paid twelve and a half pieces (on the side). His height was filled in front of him and behind him, six cubits and a span. Therefore, he fell on his face between the legs of David, as it is said (Psalms 110:1) "The Lord said to my lord, sit at my right hand." Another explanation is why on his face, because Dagon, his god, was troubled in his heart to fulfill what is said (Leviticus 26:30) "And I will cast your carcasses upon the carcasses of your idols." Another explanation is why on his face, to fulfill what is said (Psalms 18:41) "They cried, but there was none to save them; even unto the LORD, but He answered them not." I will destroy them; I will make the decision for their strange death, as it is said (Leviticus 25:46) "To be your property absolutely."

And thus is it written (Ibid. 35:22) "And it was, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuven went and lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine, and Israel heard." When Jacob heard this, he shuddered and said: Can it be that there is "base matter" in my sons! — until he was told by the L-rd that Reuven had repented, as it is written (Ibid.) "And the sons of Jacob were twelve" (including Reuven.) We are hereby taught that Reuven afflicted himself all of his days because of that act, until Moses accepted his penitence, viz. (Devarim 33:6) "Reuven shall live (in this world) and he shall not die" (in the world to come).

And see further that the Holy One Blessed be He does not withhold [any] reward [that is due]. We have already mentioned above that in the counsel of Judah there was also great good for Joseph, for he rescued him from death. It was in this regard that Jacob said about him (Bereshith 49:8): "Judah — you, will your brothers praise" (see Rashi there). Our sages of blessed memory have said that because he saved Joseph from death the L-rd pitied the kingdom of the house of Judah, not destroying their seed until the destruction of the Temple, unlike the other kings of Israel, who were all temporary. When one finished his [allotted] time, another arose and killed him and his entire household, not leaving a trace — as opposed to the kings of the house of David, of the seed of Judah.

The first part of this quote is the same that we saw above—Sefer Hayashar is Genesis. Then the Talmud asks where the hint is in Genesis that the children of Judah should learn to use the bow. This they find in a creative reading of Jacob’s blessing in Genesis 49:8. Judah is told that his hands will be on the neck of your enemies. The midrash interprets this to mean not on the neck, but directed at their necks, with arrows.

2 Masekhet Soferim has different definitions: a petuha is anything which does not start at the head of the line. A setuma is anything that stops in the middle of the line. How much must be left at the beginning of the line for it to be called a petuha? Enough to write a word of three letters. How much must be left in the middle of the line for it to be called a setuma? Enough to write a word of three letters. [End Masekhet Soferim quote.] Suppose he finished a paragraph at the edge of the page and started a new line, and left enough space at the beginning of that line to write three letters, and then started to write? Come and learn from the two sources; the baraita gives the essence of the issue. The baraita reasons that the beginning of the line is what determines a petuha, not the end of the line [so the example case is a petuha according to the baraita]; if one leaves a gap at the beginning and also at the end of the line, it is still a petuha. But the old siddur reasons that it is the end of the line that determines a petuha, not the beginning of the line [so the example case is a setuma according to the baraita]. [To avoid ambiguity, therefore...] if he makes a petuha with space both at the end of the line and at the beginning of the line it is good for both of them. This is correct. There is also another order of petuhot and setumot which seems entirely unconvincing. And these are the tagin of a sefer Torah and the petuhot and setumot according to the masoretic tradition. ביה שמו: the following words should be placed at the beginning of a line and the top of a column: Bereshit (Gen. 1:1); Yehudah ata yodukha (Gen. 49:8); Haba-im ahareihem bayam (Ex. 14:28); Shemor ve-shamarta (Deut. 12:28); Motza sefateikha (Deut. 23:24); Ve-a'ida bam (Deut. 31:28).

והנה היא לאה, “and lo and behold it was Leah.” Our sages (Megillah,13) ask the obvious question: “had she not been Leah up until now?” What did the Torah mean by writing “and here it was Leah?” They answer that Yaakov had supplied Rachel with a secret code to protect himself precisely against the duplicity practiced by Lavan under the wedding canopy when the girl’s face is veiled so the groom cannot see her. When Rachel became aware of what her father was doing, she realized that her sister was going to be publicly shamed. She therefore decided to spare Leah the embarrassment and told her of the secret code. Bereshit Rabbah 71,5 phrases it thus: “Rachel made silence her trademark (vocation); as a result all her sons were able to keep secrets, on the other hand, Leah made gratitude her trademark (vocation); as a result we find that all her sons are recorded as confessing errors and giving thanks to G’d. Binyamin, a son of Rachel knew that Joseph had been sold but he kept the secret. Saul, a descendant of Binyamin is reported in Samuel 10, 16 as ואת דבר המלוכה לא הגיד לו not telling even his uncle that Samuel had told him he would become king. [The uncle had been aware that Saul had had an interview with Samuel the Seer and titular head of the nation. The prophet had told him not to worry, that the asses had been located. Ed.] Another descendant of Rachel who was distinguished by keeping silent at crucial times was Queen Esther who obeyed Mordechai’s instructions not to reveal her identity even when such a refusal resulted in the King threatening to depose her.” (Esther 2,20). Leah’s son Yehudah confessed that he had been wrong in bringing Tamar his daughter-in-law to trial as a whore. Moreover, The Torah credits him with giving thanks to the Lord (49,8), and we find David, Yehudah’s most illustrious descendant composing innumerable hymns to G’d including Psalms 136,1 in which he asks the Jewish people to give thanks to the Lord. Another descendant of Yehudah, Daniel, was in the habit of praying to G’d as a way of giving thanks to Him (Daniel 6,11).

והחזיקה במבושיו, “and she takes hold of his private parts;” a reference to parts of the male reproductive organ, the testicles, something causing the owner embarrassment on occasion. Onkelos translates the expression as בבית בהתתה, “the housing of his shame,” similar to Genesis 49,8 where Yaakov commends Yehudah for not being ashamed to admit he had been wrong. The Torah punishes the woman in question by writing: “you shall cut off her (offending) hand.” Clearly, the text is not to be understood literally, but it means that financial compensation be paid to the victim for the embarrassment he sustained. In all matters like this the Torah never decrees that the offending party be deprived of limbs or organs but that the value of the offending organ (or the organ lost by the injured party) be paid as compensation (Sifri 293). We have other similar examples of such legislation such as “an eye for an eye,” “a tooth for a tooth,” etc., where the sages always understood the wording to refer to compensation in financial terms (Baba Kama 83). The woman in question is certainly not guilty of having her hand cut off (even symbolically), seeing that what she did was only in order to save her husband. Nonetheless, the Torah does impose a financial penalty for her indiscreet behaviour.

ואעידה בכם את השמים ואת הארץ, “so that I may call upon heaven and earth as witness against you.” Concerning this introductory statement, Moses continued with the words: האזינו השמים וגו' in chapter 32, 1. At this point he merely pointed out that heaven and earth would put their seal on his words at the end of the song in Haazinu. He invited heaven and earth to be present so that at the end of Haazinu they would be in a position to “sign” the document, much as witnesses to documents prepared in court are present during the preparation of the document so that they know what they are signatories to. He had made a similar statement earlier in 30,19. All of these passages were written on the same day. We have a halachah (Maimonides Hilchot Sefer Torah 7,3) that the words ואעידה, etc., have to be written at the top of the column in which the chapter commencing with the song האזינו השמים ואדברה commences. This would be the concluding letter (acronym) of the two words ב)י'ה שמ'ו), which are scattered throughout the Torah as letters which have to be written at the top of a column, i.e. the first letter of a verse respectively. Compare Genesis 49,8, Exodus 14,28; Exodus 34,11; Numbers 24,5, and our verse here commencing with the letter ו in the word ואעידה. I have already referred to this in Parshat Beshalach 14,28 in connection with the word הבאים. The letter ו in the word ואעידה is an allusion to the same letter in the tetragram. It is symbolic of the “heaven” which Moses said he is calling as witness.

Scientific books claim that the basic number of gemstones, (not allowing for variants, mutations) are only 12 in number, so that they were all represented on the breastplate of the High Priest. They may be considered as the “patriarchs” of all other precious stones. The reason that the gemstone assigned to the tribe of Reuven was the אודם was the fact that it symbolised the blush on his face when he owned up to being guilty of his misdemeanour in Bilhah’s tent. The fact that he was not ashamed to admit his guilt is a credit to him reflected by this red-coloured stone known as “rubin.” It is supposedly found in certain areas at the bottom of the sea. It is chipped of a great rock beneath the sea, and is mined similar to silver and gold. The rock is known as Balax. Rubin and Balax are supposedly two names for the same kind of stone. The difference between them is only that the variety known as rubin is reddish looking. Onkelos also translates the word אודם as סמקן, a red stone. It is the choicest of a number of sub-categories of the same basic kind of precious stone. Seeing it is red, an essential colour reminding us of blood, it is reputed to have the power to protect a woman who wears this jewel against ever aborting any fetus she carries. Women who wear jewelry made from this stone will give birth to babies that have been growing in their wombs for the full nine months. The stone is even supposed to have positive effects upon women who are having a difficult delivery. If this stone will be crushed into powder and consumed with food and drink it displays properties similar to those of the דודאים (mandrakes?), the plant which Leah “sold” Rachel in order to help her achieve pregnancy (compare author’s comment on Genesis 30,14). The shape of those dudaim which Reuven had found at the time was the outline of a human being. This is the reason that the word אודם, normally spelled with the letter ו was spelled without that letter in order to draw our attention to the spelling which could be read “Adam,”אדם . The reading of the word teaches the nature of the stone, whereas the spelling teaches the effect of that stone, its function. Shimon’s stone פטדה, is a greenish-looking gemstone, similar to the turquoise colour of the sea in certain coastal cities. Onkelos also translates it as ירקן (emerald?). It is of the same group as the gemstone נפך, the stone with the name of Yehudah inscribed on it. Both are of similar colour, except that the stone described as נפך is the more precious of its group. It sparkles very much. The פטדה is inferior to the נפך both in colour and in sparkle. The greenish colour symbolises the terrible sexual licentiousness committed by that tribe who had caused the face of their leader Zimri to turn green in shame (Numbers 28,14). The same happened to all the other members of the tribe of Shimon who took part in that sin at that time. Darkon, dropsy, was the illness from which these people died. The positive feature of that gemstone is that it cools the body. This may be the reason it is found in hot countries such as Nubia (the Sudan). The people in that country are especially steeped in sexual licentiousness. They need to “cool off” in order to counteract their tendencies. This is why we read in Job 28,19 “topaz from Nubia cannot match its value (that of rubies).” The reason Job made this comparison was because these stones were found in Nubia. The stone which bore the name of Levi was the ברקת, known popularly as carbuncle (a rounded gemstone without facets). It is so called as it flashes just like a bolt of lightning, ברק. It illuminates like a lamp. Onkelos also translates it as ברקן, a flashing stone. This was the gemstone Noach hung in the ark to provide him with light. The Torah referred to this light in Genesis 6,15 צהר תעשה לתבה. Isaiah refers to it as אקדח, in Isaiah 54,12 where, speaking of the future of Israel he writes: ”I will make your battlements rubies and your gates of precious stones, i.e. לאבני אקדח.” The name is justified as it appears glowing like red-hot coals. A similar expression occurs also in Isaiah 50,11: “kindlers of fire.” The reason this stone was chosen to symbolise Levi was that the Levites illuminate the people by teaching them spiritual illumination, i.e. Torah, as we know from Deut. 33,10 יורו משפטיך ליעקב ותורתך לישראל, “they teach Your judgments to Yaakov and Your Torah to Israel.” We also know of Moses, who was of the tribe of Levi, that the whole house was filled with light when he was born as the Midrash (Shemot Rabbah 1,24) interpreted the words in Exodus there (Exodus 2,2) that “she (his mother) saw that he was good.” Furthermore, when Moses returned from Mount Sinai with the second sets of Tablets the Torah testified that the skin of his face emitted rays of light (Exodus 34,29). We have another verse (Kohelet 8,1) “a man’s wisdom lights up his face.” The positive value of this gemstone is that it is apt to enlighten the foolish, providing him with insights he never had. This is in addition to the general usefulness of that jewel in providing light just as does a lamp. People say that if one pounds this carbuncle into fine dust and mixes it with food or drink as one mixes certain medicinal herbs into the food it proves very capable of providing wisdom and opening up previously “closed” hearts. Yehudah’s name was inscribed on the gemstone called נפך as we mentioned already. This jewel is known either as merkedy or zemurah in Arabic. Onkelos’ translation azmoragdin, (emerald) can support either one of these names. He chose a combination of these two words. As already mentioned, it is a greenish stone of high luster and represented his shame-facedness in accusing his daughter-in-law Tamar’s pregnancy as being the result of harlotry when he himself had fathered the child she was carrying (Genesis 38,26). Seeing that he overcame his embarrassment and made a public confession of his own involvement, this stone, i.e. its color, was chosen as appropriate for him. In addition he also had had to bear the shame, i.e. his face turning green, in the matter of having sold Joseph and his father suspecting him of this though the matter had never been spoken of. When Yaakov blessed Yehudah on his deathbed saying: “from the prey, my son, you elevated yourself,” he wanted him to know that he suspected him of having been involved in the deception which had made Yaakov call out in anguish: “a wild beast has torn Joseph to shreds (Genesis 37,33).” When hearing his father say that he considered Yehudah as having elevated himself, i.e. having exonerated himself from that guilt, his face was restored to its original colour after all these years. It then resembled the appearance of the emerald giving off a sparkle. It is also written of Yehudah (Genesis 49,8) “your hand is at the neck of your enemy,” and the outstanding feature of the gemstone emerald is that people wearing it experience that their enemies turn their neck towards them, i.e. that they attempt to flee. This is the reason this jewel is known as נפך. The Bible comments on Yehudah’s bravery in battle more than once, and it is written of David (Samuel I 18,7) that he defeated his enemies in their tens of thousands, Of the messiah it is written: (Isaiah 11,4) “with the spirit (breath) of his mouth he will kill the wicked.” Issachar’s name was inscribed on a jewel called ספיר, sapphire, a jewel known as sephily of a blue colour. It had been assigned to Issachar because he was extremely wise and his tribe excelled in Torah knowledge. This has been attested to in Chronicles I 12,32. We have a tradition that the Tablets with the Ten Commandments were made of sapphire (Tanchuma Ki Tissa 26). We also find another reference to this jewel in Exodus 24,10 where the vision of G’d seen by the elders and the nobles is described as their observing with their mental eyes the appearance of bricks made of sapphire. It is a well known fact that the souls of Torah scholars are part of a whole bundle of souls beneath the throne of G’d’s attribute כבוד. This is derived from Ezekiel 1,26: “as the semblance of a throne, in appearance like sapphire.” The blue color of this jewel is not like the blue which denotes haughtiness similar to certain shades of red or green; on the contrary, it is a color symbolizing humility, modesty, a character trait equally becoming to both young and old. This is what Isaiah 57,15 meant when he wrote: “I dwell on high, in holiness; yet with the contrite and lowly in spirit.” The outstanding feature of this jewel is that it is good for one’s eyesight; this is the reason people have a habit of passing this jewel back and forth in front of their eyes. It was appropriate for Issachar as Torah also provides enlightenment. There is a popular saying that this jewel is useful in getting rid of all manner of pains and any swelling one experiences in any part of one’s body. The Torah too is a powerful remedy for all parts of the body. We have been told in Eyruvin 54 that if someone suffers from headaches the best remedy is to immerse oneself in the study of Torah. The name of Zevulun was inscribed on the gemstone known as יהלום, diamond. This gemstone is known as pirle, same as bedolach. It is clear, transparent. It is to remind us of “white” silver, an allusion to the material wealth of the tribe of Zevulun. We know from Yaakov’s blessing of Zevulun in Genesis 49,13 that he was a great trader sending his ships far afield in order to bring home wealth from foreign lands. It was appropriate therefore that the stone bearing his name was the diamond. The special property of the diamond for man is that it helps one to go to sleep, something Leah referred to when she (the mother of Zevulun) said after he was born: “this time my husband will make his permanent home with me” (Genesis 30,20). [I believe what the author meant was that possession of diamonds allows people to sleep easy as they feel emotionally and economically secure. Ed.] The name of the tribe of Dan was inscribed on a gemstone called לשם, known as opal, or ashtefassis. It shows a human face turned upside down, reminiscent of the time when the tribe of Dan attempted to reverse the norms of Judaism by appointing for themselves a non-Levite as religious leader (compare Judges 18,31). We find in Joshua 19,47 that a certain town previously called Leshem was renamed Dan in commemoration of the founding father of that tribe. This city became an integral part of the land of Israel. The name of the tribe of Naftali was inscribed on a jewel known as שבו, agate. It is commonly known as turquoise. [The various names which I have spelled in italics appear to be the equivalents of these gems’ names in Spanish or old French during the time of the author. Ed.] Onkelos also translates it as טרקיא. The special property ascribed to that gemstone was that it “pulls” man while riding in carriages or riding horses and enables him to become successful as a driver or rider. This occurs through man and beast developing mutual affinity for each other while man sits in the saddle. It was appropriate for Naftali to be associated with this gemstone as at the time he was born his step-mother Rachel had said that she had prevailed in a struggle with the attribute of Justice and her sister and as a result her handmaid had born this son for her. Rachel also had to use all her abilities (she thought) in order to have a son at least through her handmaid (compare Genesis 30,8). The gemstone bearing the name of Gad was the אחלמה, popularly known as crystal. This is why Onkelos translates the word as עין עגלא. A better known gemstone called lemon is similar to it but reddish in appearance. The reason this gemstone was used to symbolize Gad was that seeing the gemstone crystal is very common and everyone is familiar with it, the members of the tribe of Gad were also widely known as were the people who had been slain by this tribe in the wars of Israel against the Canaanites. This is the meaning of Deut. 33,20 וטרף זרעו קדקד , “tearing off arm, and even head.” The special property of this gemstone is that it reinforces the resolve of one’s heart when going to war and prevents one from becoming faint-hearted. The gemstone gives man strength. It is called אחלמה, as that word is connected to מלחמה, attributes needed to be successful in battle. The expression occurs in that sense in Isaiah 38,16: ותחלימני ותחיני, “You have restored me to health and have revived me.” The idea is that G’d made King Chiskiyah strong again. Another verse with a similar message is Job 39,4 where G’d speaks to Job about the health of the hinds, etc., saying יחלמו בניהם ירבו בבר, “their young are healthy (strong) able to grow up in the open fields.” The gemstone on which the name of the tribe of Asher was inscribed is called תרשיש, better known as cariolica, topaz, chrysolite. Its color is close to that of oil (olive oil). Others say that its color is azure-blue (compare R' David Kimchi). Onkelos translates it as כרום ימא, aquamarine. The reason is that the color of the sea resembles that of azure-blue. The name Tarshish appears also as a destination in the ship hired by the prophet Jonah, presumably because these gems could be found in that country. The special property of this topaz is to facilitate in the digestion of foods. It is even more important if one first pulverizes it and mixes the powder into one’s food. It will then make a mass similar to a mixture of flour and oil. The Torah extols Asher’s land portion within the land of Israel as being particularly full of oil, i.e. rich soil as we know from Yaakov’s blessing in Genesis 49,20. The gemstone bearing the name of the tribe of Joseph was called שהם, better known as onyx. The special property of this jewel is that its owners enjoy favor in the eyes of people. The letters in that stone also spell השם when read in a different order. This is an allusion to the verse in Genesis 39,2: “G’d was with Joseph and he became a successful man;” or, Genesis 39,24 “G’d made the warden of the prison like Joseph, etc.” Anyone who wears the jewel in the king’s palace will find that he becomes very successful and that his suggestions will be well received. The name of the gemstone on which Binyamin’s name was inscribed was ישפה, better known as jasper. It is a multi-colored gem consisting of red, black, green. Binyamin had many contradictory thoughts about the sale of Joseph by his brothers, all of which are reflected in the different colours of the jasper. The special property of that stone is that it stops the flow of blood. The reason this gemstone was assigned to the tribe of Binyamin had to do with the founder of that tribe not being able to decide if to tell his father that Joseph was most likely alive, or to keep silent as he could not foresee how Yaakov would react to such information. In the end he controlled himself, stopped himself, and did not reveal what he knew. The word ישפה may be understood as two words, i.e. יש פה, “he has a mouth,” or words to that effect. The name of that stone alludes to the fact hat Binyamin deserved credit for keeping silent about what he knew his brothers had done to his older brother Joseph. This completes the discussion about the twelve gemstones on the breastplate of the High Priest. All the details connected with the stones, the breastplate, the inscriptions, etc., are part and parcel of the detailed supervision G’d exercises over the fate of the Jewish people in all its aspects.

DAN SHALL JUDGE ‘YADIN’ HIS PEOPLE. This has the same meaning as in the verse, For the Eternal ‘yadin’ His people, (Deuteronomy 32:36.) which Onkelos translates as, “For the Eternal will judge the judgment of His people,” (Here also, the sense of the verse is: “Dan will judge the judgment of his people.”) just as in the expressions: Be thou my judge, O G-d, and plead my cause against an ungodly nation; (Psalms 43:1.) The cause of the widow. (Isaiah 1:23. The reference should rather be to Verse 17 there: rivu almanah (plead for the widow), which means rivu riv almanah (plead the plea of the widow). Here, likewise, the sense of the verse is: “Dan will judge the judgment of his people.” (T’chelet Mordechai. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 270, Note 39.)) The verse is thus stating that Dan will avenge the cause of his people, all the tribes of Israel, as one. (As explained further in the text, it is clear that Ramban is transposing the words of the verse and interpreting it in the following way: “Dan will judge his people,” that is, Samson, a descendant of the tribe of Dan, will avenge the cause of his people from the hands of the Philistines. And who are “his people?” All “the tribes of Israel.” And how will that help affect them? “As one,” that is, as one whole nation, for when, at the time of Samson’s death, the Philistines’ temple collapsed, all the lords of the Philistines (Judges 16:27) died, and thus all “the tribes of Israel as one” were delivered from their hands.) And the purport of it is as follows: The Philistines wronged all Israel many times. In the days of Shamgar the son of Anath (Judges 3:31.) they began their oppression of Israel, and in the days of Jephthah it is written, And He gave them over into the hand of the Philistines, (Ibid., 10:7.) and after the days of Abdon the son of Hillel, (Ibid., 12:13.) it is also written, And the Eternal delivered them into the hand of the Philistines forty years. (Ibid., 13:1.) There was none among the Judges who subdued them or had any victory at all over them. Now although it is written concerning Shamgar, And he smote the Philistines six hundred men with an ox-goad, (Judges 3:31.) this was not “vengeance,” relatively speaking, as it was not a great slaughter. (II Chronicles 13:17.) This is why it is written concerning Samson, And he shall begin to save Israel out of the hand of the Philistines, (Judges 13:5.) and he avenged the cause of Israel from them for he slew many people and killed all the lords of the Philistines. (See ibid., 16:27 and 30.) Scripture mentions yadin (he will judge), since this avenger was a judge, not a king. It is possible that this interpretation coincides with the opinion of Onkelos, who translated: “In his days his people will be delivered.” (Thus it is clear that Onkelos also explained the word yadin as meaning “will avenge.” See also my Hebrew commentary, p. 270.) It is possible that the expression, as one of the tribes of Israel, means “as the outstanding one of the tribes,” namely, Judah, concerning whom it is said, Thy hand shall be on the neck of thine enemies, (Above, Verse 8.) thus implying that this one also (The judge from the tribe of Dan, namely, Samson.) will be victorious over his enemies and subdue them.

בני אמך, here the word וישתחו appears in the singular, whereas in a parallel blessing pronounced by Yaakov who had several wives (Genesis 49,8) the word וישתחוו appears in the plural.

Behold it is written in the Seifer HaYoshor. This is written in Seifer Bereishis, which is the Seifer of the righteous, (Rashi is citing the opinion of Rav Yochonon in Avodah Zarah, 25a.) Avraham, Yitzchok and Yaakov. And where [In Bereishis] is it hinted at? "Your hand will be on the neck of your enemies." (Bereishis 49:8.) What type of warfare is it where he places his hand next to his forehead, (When pulling back the string of his bow. Rashi in Avodah Zarah, ibid writes the archer places his hand next to his eyes. This is how they sight their targets.) which is opposite his neck? (This interpretation reads the verse in Bereishis differently: “your hand will be on your neck.” See Marsho, Avodah Zarah ibid.) One must say: this is archery.

The Talmud compares the greatness of Yosef to that of Yehudah, stating that they both were able to make a kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God). At the same time, the Talmud states that Yehudah was greater. Whereas Yosef ’s kiddush Hashem, pushing off the advances of Potiphar’s wife, was done in private, the Talmud points out that Yehudah’s acknowledgment that he had mistreated Tamar occurred in public (Sotah 10b and 36b). On the face of it, the comparison seems unfair. After all, Yosef ’s stand could have been taken only in private. Even as this is true, Yehudah’s gesture did not have to be public. On the contrary, Tamar allowed for what we would expect any savvy politician to do – taking care of his debt to her privately. Occasional scandals notwithstanding, this is inevitably the road of the Noachide politician. In Noachide politics, personal image is everything and consequently must be saved at all costs. Yehudah, however, as per the Talmud, is more interested in setting a personal example for his community than the resulting personal embarrassment. Thus, he went out of his way to make a private issue public, so that people could learn about the tremendous importance of honesty and accountability. In this, Yehudah is the prototype of a Jewish leader: completely focused on the content of his leadership, regardless of its personal political consequences. (Targum Yonatan on Bereshit 49:8 makes this exact point by understanding Yaakov’s blessing to Yehudah that his brothers will acknowledge him (as their leader) in the following manner: “Since you acknowledged the matter of Tamar, your brothers will acknowledge you….”)

[26] For this reason too Jacob gives as a special portion to Joseph Shechem (Gen. 48:22), the things of the body and of the senses, as he is occupied in toiling at these things, but to Judah who openly acknowledges God he gives not presents, but praise and hymns and hallowed songs from his brethren (Gen. 49:8). Jacob receives Shechem not from God, but by dint of “sword and bow,” words that pierce and parry. For the wise man subjects to himself the secondary as well as the primary objects, but, having subjected them, does not keep them, but bestows them on him to whose nature they are akin.

The Gemara further analyzes the verse in Samuel: And where is it alluded to in Genesis that Judah must be taught to use the bow? The verse states: “Judah, your brothers shall praise you; your hand shall be on the nape of your enemies” (Genesis 49:8). The Gemara explains: What is the form of warfare that requires one’s hand to be held opposite the nape? You must say that this is referring to the use of a bow. This is the referent of the verse in Samuel.

HALAKHAH: “There was no law of siqariqon in Judea” etc. (This sentence and part of the next is also in Ketubot 1:5 (Notes 196–199). Variants are given by כ.) In earlier times they decided on a persecution in Judea because they had a tradition from their forefathers that Jehudah had killed Esaw, as it is written: “Your hand is on your enemies’ neck.” They went and enslaved them, took their fields and sold them to third parties. The original owners could come and repossess (After the Jewish court system was reestablished under R. Jehudah.) ; therefore the land was left absolutely in the hand of the siqariqon since they refrained from buying (As long as the court held that a forced sale was invalid.) . “They decreed that the law of siqariqon should not apply in Jehudah (Nobody had the right to reclaim from third parties land he had given away to save his life.) . When was this said? About war killings before the war (In the anarchy between the begin of the revolt and the occupation of the Land by Roman forces.) . But about anybody killed in and after the war, the notion of siqariqon does not apply (In Tosephta 3:10: “But about anybody killed in and after the war, the notion of siqariqon applies.” The Yerushalmi text should not be corrected based on Tosephta or Babli. Since one refers to the war of Bar Kokhba and the Hadrianic decrees in its aftermath, it is clear that the situation during and after the war was worse than before the war. One does not speak of a forced sale but of the rights of the heirs of a person who was killed and his land taken by Roman soldiers or civilians. It is clear that there was no sale. Since the greater part of the Jewish population of Judea was either killed in the war or deported as slaves, it made no sense for the organizers of the survivors to take notice of prior ownership. One has to assume that “Judea” means the Judean hills, to exclude the settlements in the plain centered around Lydda.) .” But are those killed before the war not like those killed after the war? Explain it that a siqariqon came and robbed and suppressed; there was no time left to write the sales contract before murder engulfed the entire world, that practice should not be partial (Robberies during the anarchy before the Roman invasion cannot be separated from what happened during the war; in both cases no documentation can be recovered.) .

HALAKHAH: “If somebody eats at his father-in-law’s,” etc. In earlier times (The only time when the Roman government could be supposed to act officially in the manner described was during Hadrian’s persecution in the aftermath of the war of Bar Kokhba.) they decided on a persecution in Judea because they had a tradition from their forefathers that Jehudah had killed Esaw (“Esaw” is a code name for Rome; e. g., Eccl.rabba to 5:7. The story that Jehudah killed Esaw when the latter wanted to kill Jacob at Isaac’s funeral is in Midraš Soḥer ṭob 18:32, mentioned in Sifry Deut. 348, quoted in Yalquṭ Šim‘ony 162. In the tradition of the Babli, Soṭa 13a, Esaw was killed by Ḥushim ben Dan at Jacob’s funeral.) , as it is written (Gen. 49:8.) : “Your hand is on your enemies’ neck.” They went and enslaved them (After the war of Bar Kokhba, most of the Jewish population of Judea were sold as slaves.) and raped their daughters; they decided that a soldier (Greek στρατιώτης. In the considerably toned down version of the Babli, 3b, it was only the general, ἡγεμών, who would exercise a ius primae noctis over girls married on Wednesdays.) would have sex with her first. They decreed that her husband should come to her when still in her father’s house (After the preliminary marriage.) ; for when she knows that her husband’s fear is on her she is drawn after him (The commentaries and S. Lieberman emend נִגְרֶרֶת to נִגְדֶּרֶת “she is fenced in.” This emendation has to be rejected since it is understandable that one should want the girl to be drawn to her husband and not to the soldier with whom she otherwise would have her first sexual experience.) . But is she not in the end being used for sex by a soldier? She is raped, and a rape victim is permitted to her husband (Sifry Num. 7, based on Num. 5:13.) . What did Cohanot do? They were hiding them. Why did they not also hide the daughters of Israel? That becomes talk (If everybody does it, it cannot be kept secret.) and the government hears it; then these and those will be taken together. What kind of a sign did they have? The talk of a cook (Greek μάγειρος, ὁ, “cook, butcher”.) in town: There is a wedding meal, there is a wedding meal (While in biblical Hebrew מִשְׁתֶּה is any festive meal, in rabbinic Hebrew the term is used exclusively for wedding festivities. Since one could not speak of weddings during the persecution, one spoke of the cook.) ; there is light in Beror-Ḥayil (Beror-Ḥayil was the residence of Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai after the first war with the Romans; it must have been in the imperial domain of Jabneh, in the plain. Lights were lit to indicate an invitation to attend a forbidden circumcision, just as the presence of a professional cook indicated a wedding.) : a week for a son, a week for a son. When the persecution ended, the custom did not end. Rebbi Hoshaia’s (He taught in Galilee 100 years after the Hadrianic persecution. His family was from Judea, where his father still lived (Niddah 3:3, 50 c 1. 71).) daughter-in-law was pregnant when she married definitively.

The Gemara explains that their wise remark, which earned them their distinction, is contained in their advice: “If Mordecai be of the seed of the Jews [Yehudim], then you will not prevail over him” (Esther 6:13). The word Yehudim can also refer to people from the tribe of Judah. Haman’s wise men thereby said to him: If he descends from the other tribes, you can still prevail over him, but if he descends from the tribe of either Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, or Manasseh, you cannot prevail over him. With regard to Judah, the proof of this is as it is written: “Your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies” (Genesis 49:8), indicating that Judah will emerge victorious over his enemies. And the proof that Haman cannot prevail over the others that were mentioned is as it is written with regard to them: “Before Ephraim and Benjamin and Manasseh, stir up Your might” (Psalms 80:3).

Yehudah, your brothers will praise you [you confessed, and you were not ashamed. Your brothers will acknowledge you.] Your hand will be on the neck of [overpower] your enemies. [Your haters will be dispersed. They will turn the back of their necks to you.] Your father’s sons will prostrate themselves to you [greet you first].

JEHUDA, thee shall all thy brethren praise, and from thy name shall all be called Jehudaee; thy hand shall avenge thee of thy adversaries; all the sons of thy father shall come before thee with salutation.

Jehuda, thou didst make confession in the matter of Tamar: therefore shall thy brethren confess thee, and shall be called Jehudain from thy name. Thy hand shall avenge thee of thy adversaries, in throwing arrows upon them when they turn their backs before thee; and the sons of thy fathers shall come before thee with salutations.

Genesis 49,9., “Yehudah is like a lion’s whelp; you ‎have grown from merely capturing prey, my son.” ‎‎Rashi’s commentary on this verse draws attention to the ‎fact that in the first half Yehudah is described as ‎גור אריה‎, “an ‎immature lion”, (as in Samuel II,5,2 describing David, while King ‎Sha-ul was still alive, whereas later on when he was on the throne ‎he is described as ‎אריה‎, a fully mature lion).‎ We have explained repeatedly, that the principal purpose ‎of the Jewish people having been sent into exile is to “save” some ‎of the “sparks” that had descended from the “Shechinah” so ‎that they could return to their celestial habitat. [Compare ‎reference to this concept on pages 21-22. Ed.] As soon as ‎this purpose of the exile will have been accomplished, and, as a ‎result, evil will have been expunged from our regions, seeing that ‎had it not been for Adam’s sin, it would never have been possible ‎to feel “at home” on earth, the final redemption will follow in its ‎wake.

An alternate explanation of the line commencing with: ‎גור ‏אריה יהודה מטרף בני עלית‎. We base this on a statement of our sages ‎in Midot 4,7 where the Mishnah says: “just as a lion is ‎broad in front and narrow in its rear, so the main structure of the ‎Holy Temple, the one known as ‎היכל‎, Sanctuary, was broad at its ‎entrance, whereas the two Sanctuaries, including the ‎קדשי קדשים‎ ‎at the rear of the structure, was narrow.” The symbolism derived ‎from this appearance of the Temple is that when G’d appears to ‎shower the gentile nations with all kinds of material blessings, the ‎reason is that He wishes to reward them for whatever good they ‎have done while on earth before they die, so that He does not ‎have to recompense them in the Hereafter. The very opposite is ‎the case in G’d’s relations with the Jewish people. G’d wishes to ‎store up as much of the reward due to his faithful Jews for the ‎Hereafter as is compatible with their lives on earth remaining ‎tolerable. When Yaakov says to Yehudah that he had arisen, i.e. ‎done repentance from his misguided treatment of his brother ‎Joseph whom he had treated as if he were the loot captured in a ‎hunt, this assured him of ample reward in the hereafter. We have ‎confirmation of that concept when the Talmud in B’rachot ‎‎34 states that the ethical platform occupied by repentant sinners ‎is far higher than the platform occupied by people who have ‎never sinned, and who therefore never had to repent.‎

מטרף בני עלית, “you removed yourself from the temptation to treat my son as your prey.” According to Rashi here; “you did not consider that killing my son Joseph would be an achievement.” Yaakov admits that he had once suspected him of having killed Joseph. In the Talmud Sanhedrin 6 and 7, the expression בצע used by Yehudah when persuading his brothers not to kill Joseph (37,26) is not understood as Yaakov praising Yehudah for not killing; rather it is a compliment to him for admitting to have been wrong when he accused his daughterinlaw Tamar of harlotry when it had been he who had sought out an assignation with someone whom he thought of as a harlot. He had cancelled the decree to execute her and the two fetuses she was carrying, thereby publicly shaming himself. (Genesis 38,26)

גור אריה יהודה, all young free roaming animals are known as גור. Yehudah is distinguished as being described as a young lion, the king of the beasts. This was a hint that David, in due course, would be descended from him. The numerical value of the first letters in the three words:גור אריה יהודה, is the same as that of the three letters in the name דוד =14.

מטרף בני עלית, “you removed yourself from the kill, my son;” [our author does not accept this as the appropriate translation. Ed] He interprets the line as a prophecy, i.e. David’s eventually becoming the King of all of Israel, will be based on the skills he will demonstrate in overcoming attacks upon him by a bear and a lion, and his having prevailed in those encounters. (Compare Samuel I 17,36) His performance when facing Goliath was witnessed by many, in addition.

He equated him with a lion which is the strongest of the animals; and compared him to a young lion, regarding his lightness and alacrity [being] beyond the adult lion. That is why he used two nouns, as "cub" alone is also said about other animals when they are small; as it is stated (Lamentations 4:3), "Even jackals offer the breast, and suckle their cubs." And the intention here is cub of the lion species, and it is a construct phrase. And so did Yonatan ben Uzziel translate, "I compare you, Judah, to a cub that is the child of lions." But to me, it appears that gur is an expression of provoking, [like] the expression, "every day, they provoke (yaguru) wars" (Psalms 140:3); [and] "begin to inherit, and provoke (hitgar) war against it" (Deuteronomy 2:24). And the explanation of "gur lion" is a lion that is provoked, as he is at his most dangerous then.

JUDAH IS A LION’S WHELP. Jacob compared Judah to a small lion’s whelp, to a type of whelp that grows into a lion. (The Hebrew reads, gur aryeh. Gur (whelp) can be applied to any young animal. I.E. points out that gur (whelp) aryeh (lion) means a gur that grows up to be a lion, that is, a gur of the lion family (Cherez).) The comparative caf (meaning like) has been omitted, (Scripture reads: Judah is a lion’s whelp. It should have read: Judah is as a lion’s whelp (ke-gur).) as it is in When a wild ass’s colt (ayir pere) is born a man (Job. 11:12). (There, too, a caf should have been placed before ayir pere (a wild ass’s colt). We thus see that Scripture occasionally omits the comparative caf. However, it should be supplied by the reader.)

FROM THE PREY, MY SON, THOU ART GONE UP. My son, you appear to me as a lion’s whelp when thou art gone up from the prey. From the prey means after tearing a prey apart. (According to Weiser.) This is its plain meaning. For us to interpret it as referring to the saving of Joseph, (That it means: from the prey you brought up (saved) my son (Joseph). So Cherez. Judah saved Joseph by saying, What profit is it if we slay our brother and conceal his blood (Gen. 37:26).) Scripture should have written he’elita (thou brought up) (The hifil.) rather than alita (thou art come up) which is an intransitive verb. The rest of the verse (Which reads, He stooped down, he couched as a lion, etc. (Cherez). According to Krinsky and Weiser: the next verse, which reads, The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, is proof that our verse deals with Judah’s ability as a warrior and not with his saving Joseph. I.E. literally reads: “The following verse is proof.” Filwarg suggests that the word “following” is a scribal error.) is proof that the first part of the verse deals with Judah’s tearing of a prey and not with Judah’s saving of Joseph from being a prey. Observe the verse And she brought up (va-ta’al) one of her whelps (Ezek. 19:3). (And you will see that when Scripture wants to say brought up, it employs the hifil va-ta’al. Cf. Kimchi on Ezek. 19:3. Also see Cherez.)

[HE STOOPED DOWN, HE COUCHED AS A LION.] After a lion tears its prey it sits on its knees and couches in security and no other passing animal (The lion is not afraid of any other species of animal.) will cause it to get up and flee.

Heb. labi, another word for “lion.”

גור אריה יהודה, "Yehudah is a lioncub." The Zohar section 1, page 237 explains that initially Yehudah would be like a cub, גור, whereas later on he would be a fully grown lion, אריה. If this was so, why did Jacob have to tell us that there was a time when Yehudah was still only a cub? Besides, what did Jacob mean when he said: מטרף בני עלית "you removed yourself from my son, from the kill?" According to our sages the word בני may be read both as belonging to what was mentioned before as well as to what follows, i.e. "you my son have arisen." Accordingly, Yehudah had distanced himself from what the brothers had done when Jacob had exclaimed: "my son has been torn to shreds." It is difficult to reconcile this with the facts. Why would Jacob have assumed suddenly that Yehudah had no share in the brothers' plot to deceive him and to make him believe that Joseph had become the victim of wild animals? On the contrary, is it not more likely to believe that Jacob had never suspected any of his sons to have laid a hand on Joseph? We must view the statement of our sages as דברי קבלה, as reflecting insights to which we are not privy. The words כרע רבץ מי יקימנו, also present a difficulty. Not only do these words not make sense as part of the blessing, but why did Jacob suddenly switch to indirect speech when up until now he had addressed Yehudah directly?

In order to understand these verses a short introduction will enable us to gain a deeper insight into the ways of the Torah. We perceive Adam as a tree from which all the holy souls that would ever enter the world were suspended. When Adam sinned, evil assumed a limited rule in our world and captured many of these holy souls. According to our Kabbalists it has been the task of the Jewish people to rescue as many of these holy souls who are kept prisoners within the קליפה (forces of negative spirituality), using the holy Torah and G'd's commandments all of which G'd has implanted in our midst as our weaponry. On occasion, even a close personal attachment such as the rape of a person containing a holy Jewish soul and the impure soul of a Gentile may result in a new life of a positive kind. Shechem's deep-seated attachment to Dinah, the daughter of Jacob whom he had raped may be an example of such a phenomenon (Genesis 34,33). According to Kohelet Yaakov, Dinah infused Shechem with part of her holy soul, something which eventually resulted in the emergence and liberation of the soul of Rabbi Chanina ben Tradyon. This is alluded to in the word רחבת in רחבת ידים (Genesis 34,21) the letters of which are an acronym of the respective first letters in the name דבי חנינה בן תרדיון.

On other occasions a soul which was taken captive at the time Adam sinned may emerge of its own accord at the time when the forces in charge of the קליפה decide to swamp earth with many new lives (souls). Such formerly captive holy souls who have initiated their own conversion to Judaism will often make every effort to pursue the path of goodness. This explains the phenomenon that converts very often become more meticulous in their observance of Jewish law than natural-born Jews. Ruth the Moabite and Naamah the Ammonite are part of the phenomenon we have just described. Their souls had become captive due to the acts of incest committed by their ancestor when Lot's daughters slept with their father. When their "captor" i.e. the force or angel in charge of releasing impure souls into the world, released a quantity of such souls, hoping to contaminate the earth with still more negative spirituality, two of the souls originally held captive escaped and turned out to become Ruth and Naamah. The fact that Ruth became the ancestor of David whereas Naamah became the wife Rechavam indicate the sins of their ancestor who slept with his daughters. Lot's older daughter who had the effrontery to call the name of her son i.e. מואב, i.e. "from my father," had committed a greater offence than her younger sister who called the child of that union בן עמי. The fact that Ruth was descended from Moab whereas Naamah was descended from Ammon reflects the phenomenon that the greater the spiritual morass that one has emerged from the greater the effort at one's spiritual rehabilitation. This is why David and a whole dynasty of kings is descended from Ruth, whereas Naamah the offspring of Lot's younger daughter is comparativeley less illustrious (compare Baba Kama 38 where the Talmud even attributes G'd's command to treat Ammon more mildly than Moab to the minor difference between the acts committed by Lot's two daughters). It is important to remember that if a person of lesser stature than Lot had perpetrated these acts he would not have had the good fortune that in the cause of centuries at least two good people came out of him. [I have some problem with the whole premise; according to the seven Noachidic laws it was perfectly permissible for a father to sleep with his daughter, all the more so since Lot was not even aware of it. Ed.] Just as there are different levels of righteousness amongst the observant Jews, i.e. goodness is a relative term, so there are different degrees amongst the people whose souls originate in the pool at the disposal of the forces of the קליפה. Amongst the many kings and leaders of Gentile society, all of whose souls originate in the pool of souls provided by the forces of the קליפה, some are models of virtue whereas others are models of debauchery, perfidy, and cruelty. This is the mystical dimension of what we are taught in Sotah 49 that בעקבות משיחה חוצפה יסגא, that "in the days preceding the arrival of the Messiah, effrontery will become prevalent." The sages meant that as the number of holy souls amongst the pool of souls controlled by the forces of the קליפה becomes more and more depleted, the tempering influence exercised on the whole pool of spiritually negative souls by the holy souls held captive will cease. This accounts for the fact that in days of old the souls that found their way back to the realm of holy souls produced spiritual giants such as Abraham, Sarah, Ruth and the like. Even in later generations converts such as Shemayah and Avtalyon are examples of souls who became spiritual giants amongst our people. Onkelos is another such example. Present day converts, however, are the souls who had already been greatly impoverished during their prolonged stay as captives amongst the pool of spiritually deficient souls, a pool which had been more and more depleted of such souls as the one of Abraham, Sarah, etc. The Talmud describes the period preceding the arrival of the Messiah by using the term עקבות, heels. This is an allusion to the pool of the impure souls which by that time will contain only relatively insignificant souls from the pool of holy souls that the forces of the קליפה had captured when Adam sinned. These souls are described as no more than "heels," the lower extremity of the human body, i.e. a relatively derogatory term. We can find confirmation of that thought in the Zohar 1, page 258.

With the help of this introduction we can begin to understand the advice given by G'd to Yehudah when He sent His angel and almost forced him to have intercourse with the woman whom he considered a harlot (as described in Bereshit Rabbah 85,8). On the one hand, according to Torah law, it was not appropriate for Yehudah to have sexual relations with his daughter-in-law. [I have chosen this expression because Noachide law, which Yehudah was subject to, permits relations between a father-in-law and daughter-in-law. Ed.] Inasmuch as Yehudah was unaware of that woman's identity at the time, he did not know that he committed a forbidden act. Moreover, he acted under heavenly compulsion. The combination of all these factors enabled him to release the souls of Peretz and Zerach who were part of the souls captured by the forces of evil at the time Adam ate from the tree of knowledge. We know that these two souls contained within them great spiritual potential since great people are descended from them. The "captor" of such souls, i.e. the forces of the קליפה, can be presumed to have guarded them especially carefully so that they should not escape from his clutches. No wonder then that a great individual of the calibre of royalty such as Yehudah was needed to become the instrument of their release from that captivity. Unless such a soul had been accused of the morally depraved sin of incest (the appearance of it) it might never have been able to escape its original environment amongst the spiritually inferior pool of souls.

This is what the Torah had in mind when it states, using indirect speech, i.e. G'd is speaking: גור אריה יהודה. This means that prior to Yehudah's union with Tamar he had only been a cub. This was also hinted at when his father had said to him previously: אתה יודוך אחיך, up until now you only merited that your brothers deferred to you by dint of some personal stature you possessed; this stature did not yet have historic significance. Yehudah acquired significance as a historic personality only as a result of his divinely induced union with Tamar. If you want proof of this, just search our records and see which great personalities other than Peretz and Zerach are descended from him. Once Yehudah had united with Tamar he qualified for the title אריה, a fully grown lion. Jacob then went on to explain the underlying cause of Yehudah's spiritual rise. It was מטרף בני עלית, "you my son were able to tear yourself away from the prey" i.e. from the pool of captive holy souls that had been snatched by the forces of the קליפה as the result of Adam's sin. Your divinely induced union with Tamar enabled some of these souls to become free once more and join the pool of holy souls. The sons you have acquired for yourself as a result of this union enable you to establish an everlasting dynasty.

When the Torah continued with כרע רבץ, this is a reference to the prey which proved to be the source of Yehudah's spiritual ascent, something G'd had referred to when He told Cain in Genesis 4,7: "sin crouches at its door;" Yehudah had not had a prior opportunity to rescue the precious souls of Peretz and Zerach.

When the Torah continues calling Yehudah both אריה and לביא, this is a hint that these souls were guarded within the קליפה by a power comparable to a לביא, so that only an אריה, a fully grown lion, had the power to rescue them. Yehudah was that "lion" of a holy soul who could perform such a deed successfully. As of that time the sceptre would not depart from Yehudah, i.e. he had laid the foundation for an enduring dynasty. We are still looking forward daily to the resumption of the monarchy by a descendant of Yehudah (the Messiah).

מטרף בני עלית , “from the prey, my son, you elevated yourself.” Yaakov referred to his suspicion that it had been Yehudah who had “torn Joseph like a wild beast” (37,33). Yaakov refers to Yehudah’s having had second thoughts when he had said: “what advantage is there in killing our brother?” He mentioned that “the scepter shall not depart from Yehudah until the arrival of Shiloh.” This was an allusion to the redemption from the exile in Egypt which was relatively close at hand (in terms of Jewish history). Yaakov did not feel that he could fail to allude to this redemption in view of the fact that this particular exile was about to commence as soon as he had died. How could he fail at least to allude to the first redeemer of Israel, the one who would be from the tribe of Levi, while he did allude to the eventual redeemer? He therefore alluded to the first and last redeemer by the same word, the numerical value of the word שילה being the same as the numerical value of the name משה, i.e. 345. The immediate meaning of the verse is that up until the arrival of the first redeemer, i.e. Moses, the leadership of the Jewish people will be in the hands of Yehudah. At that time the leadership of the Jewish people would revert to the tribe of Levi. Moses’ position of “king” is stressed in Deut. 33,5 ויהי בישורון מלך, “he became King in Yeshurun.” Concerning the appointment of Moses as de facto king of Israel Yaakov said here כי לו יקהת עמים, “for to him an assembly of people will congregate.” Deut. 33,5 phrases this as בהתאסף ראשי עם, “when the heads of the people would assemble around him.” The fact that the people of Israel are referred to as עמים, “nations (pl), is not unique but occurs also in Deut. 33,3. In other words, the paragraph containing the blessing of Yehudah contains also references to the first redemption the Jewish people would experience. In commenting on the plain meaning of the text of this verse, Nachmanides writes as follows: “the words ‘the scepter will not depart from Yehudah’ mean that Yaakov granted Yehudah the status of Royalty and blessed him by saying that he would not be deprived of that status by any of the other tribes. He assured him that as long as the Israel would be a kingdom, its king would be from the tribe of Yehudah The meaning of the blessing, however, was not that Israel would always be a kingdom and would always be ruled over by a king. After all we have an explicit verse in Deut. 28,36 that under certain conditions “G’d will lead you as well as your king whom you will set up over yourself to a nation you never knew, etc.” Moreover, it is an undeniable fact that nowadays we do not have a king nor princes.” It follows that Yaakov’s promise applied only to the periods in history when the whole Jewish people would be ruled over by a single king. If, temporarily, the Jewish people would be deprived of the conditions which call for it to be ruled by a king, in due course when the proper conditions return, the kingship would again be accorded to a member of the tribe of Yehudah.” This is why David said (Chronicles I 28,4) “The Lord G’d of Israel chose me of all my father’s house to be king over Israel forever. For he chose Yehudah to be ruler, and of the family of Yehudah, my father’s house; and of my father’s sons He preferred to make me king over all Israel;” We also have a verse in Chronicles II 13,5: “surely you know that the Lord G’d of Israel gave David kingship over Israel forever- to him and his sons- by a covenant of salt.” Seeing that by rights the kingship of Israel was granted only to descendants of the tribe of Yehudah, any kings from another tribe who occupied that throne were punished and could not perpetuate their dynasties. Even King Saul, the first king over Israel, was killed in battle and his sons died a violent death. The Hasmoneans (from the tribe of Levi) who claimed the throne of the Jewish people were all punished and died violent deaths as they had disregarded this cardinal rule established by Yaakov. The Hasmoneans wound up by becoming slaves to slaves (to the extent that any of them survived at all). He who took the crown by force was punished by having it taken away from him by force. Our sages in Baba Batra 3 go so far as to say that anyone claiming to be a descendant of the Hasmonean Kings is an impostor and is in fact a slave (who has falsified his genealogy). This is what Hoseah 8,4 had in mind when he said: “they appointed kings without My permission, and they made officers but not of My choice.” Apart from the fact that slaves or their descendants must not become Kings over Jews, the tribe of Levi and in particular the priests were prohibited from ascending the temporal throne. We have an explicit verse in Numbers 18,7 telling the Levites and the Priests to dedicate themselves exclusively to their tasks in tending to the altar and what is beyond the curtain. Seeing that the Hasmoneans who appointed themselves kings neglected to observe this commandment they became liable to such terrible punishment. The Jerusalem Talmud Horiot 3,2 specifically rules that priests must not be anointed as kings. Rabbi Yehudah there explains the linkage between Deut 17,20 “so that he and his descendants may reign long in the midst of Israel,” with the following verse (18,1) “the levitical priests, the whole tribe of Levi, shall have no territorial portion with Israel,” as clear evidence that the spiritual leadership of the Jewish people and its temporal leadership, i.e. the kingship, are to be separate. Ibn Ezra explains the words “the scepter shall not depart from Yehudah” as an indication that the kingship of Yehudah would not commence until David was crowned king. Accordingly, the word לא יסור must be translated: “he will not attain;” in other words: none of the descendants of Yehudah will attain a position of which it can be said that a “lawgiver has emerged from between his feet until Shiloh.” The word יסור does appear in that sense in Exodus 3,3 אסורה נא ואראה, as well as in Ruth 4,1 סורה שבה פה. In both instances the word expresses a desire to attain either information or it is an instruction to do something. עד כי יבא שילה, “until the coming of Shiloh.” According to the plain meaning of the text “until the destruction of Shiloh;” [the word יבא in the sense of “the sun is setting, i.e. its light is failing. Ed.] We also have a specific verse indicating that the reign of the house of David did not commence until after the destruction of Shiloh. In Psalms 78,67-70. Asaph says: ‘“He rejected the clan of Joseph; He did not choose the tribe of Ephrayim. He did choose the tribe of Yehudah, Mount Zion, which He loved. He built His Sanctuary like the heavens, like the earth that He established forever. He chose David, His servant, and took him from the sheepfolds.” Historically speaking, after the destruction of Shiloh (in which Eli presided as High Priest) the prophet Samuel anointed David as King (while Saul was still on the throne). It is also possible to explain this entire paragraph in which Yaakov blesses Yehudah without reading anything between the lines. Yaakov alluded to two redeemers, both in the distant future. The first one is David, son of Yishai. The second one is David reincarnated as the Messiah. I believe the very fact that the Torah devotes three separate verses to Yehudah’s blessing before mentioning the excellence of the territory Yehudah would inherit in the land of Israel (verses 11-12) supports this line of interpretation. In each of the three verses 8-10 Yehudah is mentioned by name; (something most unusual, something that does not occur in connection with any of the other sons). The reason that the name of Yehudah appears on three separate occasions in his blessing is that the blessing refers to three distinct periods of Jewish history. The Torah refers to Yehudah, son of Yaakov. Then it refers to King David. Finally, it refers to King Messiah. The first verse in which Yaakov says that his brothers will acknowledge Yehudah refers to his biological son Yehudah. In that verse Yaakov blesses his son by granting him גבורה, both spiritual and physical strength, the ability to lead his brothers in warfare as well as the authority needed to be a leader. To make certain we understand this, Yaakov addressed Yehudah by saying to him: אתה, “you.”. The second verse, where Yaakov speaks of Yehudah as גור אריה, a lion cub, he refers to King David. The reason he calls him “Yehudah” in that verse is because David is descended from Yehudah. He refers to him as גור, “a cub,’ i.e. not fully matured, as at the time when Samuel anointed David, Saul was still the effective King over Israel. David qualified for the description אריה, “lion” only after Saul had died. The words מטרף בני עלית “you arose from the prey my son,” is a reference to David having been saved from Saul’s persecution of him The words כרע רבץ כאריה, “he crouched and lay down like a lion,” refer to the time of Solomon, David’s son, when each and every Israelite is described as securely resting “under his grapevine and under his fig tree” (Kings I 5,5). Finally, the third verse, in which Yaakov says לא יסור שבט מיהודה, “the scepter will not depart from Yehudah,” is a reference to Israel’s final redeemer the King Messiah. This is why Yaakov said עד כי יבא שילה, “until ‘Shiloh’ arrives, i.e. a “son” of David [descendent, reincarnate]. The reason Yaakov described the final redeemer as “Shiloh” instead of as a son (descendant) of Yehudah is that he wanted to make sure we understand that this final redeemer would be a human being in the full sense of the word, i.e. born משלית אשה, “by woman including her afterbirth.” [Clearly the author wants to dispel the Christian concept of the Messiah being the “son of God.” Ed.] The letter ה at the end of the word שילה is a reference to the last letter in G’d’s Ineffable Name י-ה-ו-ה, a certain attribute of G’d. We have discussed this on numerous occasions. This “letter” is also known in kabbalistic jargon as בתו של אברהם, “the ‘daughter’ of Avraham,” the one married to King Solomon, the one who represents the foremost attribute of the Messiah. Concerning this attribute the prophet uses five separate expressions in Isaiah 11,2-3: “The spirit of the Lord shall alight upon him: a spirit of wisdom and insight; a spirit of counsel and valour; a spirit of devotion and reverence for the Lord. He shall sense the truth by his reverence for the Lord.” In his time “the land shall be filled with knowledge of the Lord as waters covers the sea” (verse 9). The meaning of our verse then is: “once Shiloh=the Messiah has arrived, the kingship will never again depart from this descendent of Yehudah.” According to a Midrash quoted by Rashi, the word שילה is a composition of the words שי לו, “at that time people will bring gifts to him” (the Messiah). According to Onkelos the meaning of the word שילה is שהמלכות שלו, “the kingdom belongs to him.” In this connection my own teacher Rabbi Shlomoh Adret explained that the word עד in this instance means the same as לעד, “forever.” This is to teach that the word עד does not belong to the expression כי יבא שילה. This explains why Onkelos translated it as “forever.” Onkelos translated the word כי יבא שילה as דייתא משיחא, “when the redeemer arrives.” Anyone who translates the sequence as “until the Messiah arrives” is in error. The whole message is that once the Messiah arrives the kingship will not depart anymore from Yehudah forever. We find confirmation of this theme in Daniel 2,44: “In the days of these kingdoms the G’d of heaven will establish a kingdom that will never be harmed nor will its sovereignty be left to another people; it will crumble and consume all these kingdoms and it will stand forever.” Seeing that the Christians have used this very verse to prove their theory that the Messiah (in the form of Jesus) has already arrived by interpreting our verse that the rule of Yehudah would last only until the advent of the Messiah, my teacher responded to them that, on the contrary, Yaakov stated and Daniel predicted that the kingship of Yehudah once it commences will endure forever Seeing this is not the case in our time, this is proof that the Messiah has not come until now. You should realise that when Yaakov said עד כי יבא שילה, the first redeemer as well as the last redeemer are both included. [By the “last” redeemer, the author refers to the period of the resurrection. Ed.] Both will be descendants of Yehudah and both will tend the flock of G’d in the Holy land. This is what the Talmud (Sanhedrin 91) had in mind when it discusses the fact that in Exodus 15,1 the Torah reports Moses and the Jewish people as אז ישיר instead of as אז שר “then he will sing,” instead of as “then he sang.” This wording is considered as proof that the resurrection is a Biblical Promise. Devarim Rabbah at the end of the third section uses Exodus 34,1 where G’d tells Moses to carve the second sets of tablets himself, the ones which G’d in turn will inscribe with the Ten Commandments. G’d said to Moses: “by your life, seeing you went to such lengths to secure a second set of tablets for the Jewish people in this life, when the time comes and I will send the prophet Elijah in advance of the Messiah, you too will reappear on earth.” What proof do we have that the opinion cited by the Midrash is correct? We read in Nachum 1,3: “He (G’d) travels in בסופה, whirlwind, and storm.” This is a reference to Moses of whom it is said ותשם אותו בסוף, “she (his mother) placed him in theסוף . Of Elijah we are told that ויעל אליהו בסערה השמים, “Elijah ascended to heaven in a storm” (Kings II 2,11). We have other allusions and predictions concerning the same matter such as Micah 7,15 who predicts that G’d will perform miracles in those days which parallel or excel those He performed during the time of the Exodus. The prophet quotes G’d as saying to him אראנו נפלאות, “I will show him miracles.” We would have expected G’d to say: “I will show you miracles.” This can only mean that G’d will display miracles to him who has once before experienced such miracles. This is the reason that as soon as Yaakov had concluded with his blessing for Yehudah, he added אסרי לגפן עירה ולשרקה בני אתונו, “he will tie his donkey to the vine and his donkey’s foal to the vine branch.” The similes refer to the excellence of the land of Israel, its produce and its fruit. A Midrashic approach based on (Bereshit Rabbah 99,8) The words יודוך אחיך, “your brothers will acknowledge you,” are designed to put Yehudah’s mind at rest. When Yehudah had heard his father chastise all three of his older brothers he had become afraid that his father would level criticism at him also.for his having slept with Tamar. Instead, his father used the word יודוך as a reminder of Yehudah owning up to his making his daughter-in-law Tamar pregnant. This confession of his would cause his brothers to acknowledge him as their leader. He would be their king both in the terrestrial world and in the world to come. In this terrestrial world 30 kings descended from Yehudah ascended the throne. We know this from Ruth 4,18 “these are the descendants of Peretz, etc.” When you count the number of Kings starting with David through Yehoyachin you will find a total of 20 kings. The Temple was destroyed during the reign of Tzidkiyahu. David was the tenth generation from Peretz son of Yehudah. David will also be pre-eminent in the world to come as we know from Ezekiel 37,25 “and My servant David will be their prince forever.” מטרף בני עלית. These words are understood by the Midrash as referring to four people whom Yehudah saved personally, i.e. Joseph, Tamar, Peretz and Zerach. G’d saved four more people, all of them descendants of Yehudah, i.e. Daniel, Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah. Thus far Bereshit Rabbah. The Midrash tells us that G’d saved Daniel from the pit of lions as a reward for Yehudah having saved Joseph from the pit. He saved the three righteous men Chanayah, Mishael and Azaryah from a fiery death at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar’s furnace (Daniel 3,25) because Yehudah their ancestor had saved Tamar and the twins Peretz and Zerach inside her womb from death by burning. The Midrash refers to further repercussions in the distant future due to Yehudah’s conduct, citing the fact that the first Temple was built by Solomon a descendant of Yehudah whereas the second Temple was built by Zerubabel, also a descendant of Yehudah. (compare Chagai 2,23), Zecharyah 4,9 and Zecharyah 4,7) The third Temple which we hope will be built soon will be erected by the King Messiah, also of David’s i.e. Yehudah’s descent. We base this on Isaiah 11,10. A kabbalistic approach to the words יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך, sees in the name Yehudah the beginning of an expanded awareness of a mystical connection between this world of matter and the celestial world of the spirit. The word יוודך אחיך suggests that he will be the one who transmits greater awareness of these connections to the other brothers. If Yehudah mastered the attribute of גבורה it was due to his ability to acknowledge his own mistakes. The letters in his very name are indicative of this. We find something similar in Genesis 29, 34-35 where Leah acknowledged with thanks that she had given birth to more children for Yaakov than she was entitled to on the basis of each of Yaakov’s wives bearing him three sons. Leah expressed her feelings in naming her fourth son יהודה. [The ethical lesson to be learned from all this is that gratitude, i.e. acknowledging that G’d does more for us than we are entitled to, leads to a deeper understanding of the mystical bonds that hold the terrestrial world and the celestial world together. Ed.]

גור אריה יהודה; at the beginning of his career he would be only a גור, a cub, one that has not attained maturity. Even so, such a lion is stronger than all the other beasts. Yehudah was also the first of the tribal princes to offer his inaugural sacrifice (Numbers 7,12). When it came to the war against the Canaanites in Judges 1,2 this tribe was the one leading all the others. Again, at Geva in Binyamin (Judges 20,18) the tribe of Yehudah was in the lead in the tragic civil war against the tribe of Binyamin. [at any rate a heavenly voice or the High Priest after consulting the Ephod had announced that Yehudah should be in the lead. Ed.] The first of the Judges who were heads of the nation after the death of Joshua who had failed to appoint a successor, was Othniel son of Knaz from the tribe of Yehudah. (Judges 3,9). Eventually, when David was appointed King of all the Israelites, this גור, “young lion,” became a fully grown mature lion, i.e. אריה,

מטרף בני עלית, due to the surfeit of loot you rose to a position of distinction and glory as we know from Samuel II 8,13 “David gained fame when he returned from defeating Edom in the valley of Salt.”